Asthma is not well controlled in about half of patients with the disease in the UK and Europe, increasing the risk of hospital admission and severe illness, and increasing healthcare costs. 

Now, the authors of a new study have reported that poorly controlled asthma is also associated with a higher carbon footprint, eight times higher than that of well-controlled asthma and equivalent to the greenhouse gas emissions produced by more than 124,000 homes each year in the UK.

The study was published in the journal Thorax and is part of the Healthcare-Based Environmental Cost of Treatment (CARBON) programme, which aims to provide a broader understanding of the carbon footprint associated with respiratory care. 

John Bell, BMBCh, medical director of BioPharmaceuticals Medical, AstraZeneca, and co-author of the study, said that he was surprised by the scale to which poorly controlled asthma contributed to the overall carbon footprint of asthma care. “This suggests that suboptimal asthma care is not just a public health issue, but also one which has environmental consequences,” he said.

Improving the care of asthma patients could help the NHS meet its net zero target, the authors suggested.
 

SABA – Largest Contributor to Asthma-Related Greenhouse Gases

Healthcare is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. In 2020, the NHS set an ambitious target of reducing its carbon footprint by 80% over the next 15 years, with the aim of reaching net zero by 2045.

To estimate the environmental footprint of asthma care in the UK, the researchers retrospectively analyzed anonymized data of 236,506 people with asthma submitted to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink between 2008 and 2019. 

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, measured as carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e), were then estimated for asthma-related medication use, healthcare resource utilization, and severe exacerbations.

Well-controlled asthma was considered as having no episodes of severe worsening symptoms and fewer than three prescriptions of short-acting beta-agonists (SABAs) reliever inhalers in a year. Poorly controlled asthma included three or more SABA canister prescriptions or one or more episodes of severe worsening symptoms in a year.

Almost one in two patients with asthma (47.3%) were categorized as being poorly controlled. 

The researchers estimated the overall carbon footprint attributed to asthma care when scaled to the entire UK asthma population was 750,540 tonnes CO2e/year, with poorly controlled asthma contributing to excess GHG emissions of 303,874 tonnes CO2e/year. 

“Poorly controlled asthma generated three-fold higher greenhouse gas emissions per capita compared with well-controlled asthma, when taking into account GHG emissions related to all aspects of asthma care, including routine prescribing and management,” Dr. Bell explained. It also generated eight-fold higher excess per capita carbon footprint compared to well-controlled asthma.

SABA relievers represented the largest contributors to per capita asthma-related GHG emissions, accounting for more than 60% of overall GHG emissions and more than 90% of excess GHG emissions. The remainder was mostly due to healthcare resource utilization, such as GP and hospital visits, required to treat severe worsening symptoms.

The researchers acknowledged various limitations to their findings, including that the study results were largely descriptive in nature. And factors other than the level of asthma symptom control, such as prescribing patterns, may also have contributed to high SABA use.
 

Couple Optimized Patient Outcomes With Environmental Targets

With inappropriate SABA use having emerged as the single largest contributor to asthma care-related GHG emissions, improving this care could achieve substantial carbon emissions savings and help the NHS meet its net zero target, the authors explained. 

This improvement could include the adoption of the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) treatment strategies that, since 2019, no longer recommends that SABAs are used alone as the preferred reliever for acute asthma symptoms, the authors wrote. 

However, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) asthma guidelines still recommend SABA alone as a reliever therapy.

On the other hand, the Primary Care Respiratory Society (PCRS) highlights on its website that the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) had approved the use of a dual (inhaled corticosteroid/formoterol) combination treatment to be used as a reliever therapy for people aged 12 and over.

“In the UK, this new therapy option does not yet sit within an approved national guideline as NICE last updated its treatment pathway in 2020. We await a new national asthma guideline but do not anticipate this new joint approach between NICE, BTS [British Thoracic Society], and SIGN [Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network] to publish until 2024,” the society wrote.

Dr. Bell explained that the carbon footprint of asthma care increased with higher socio-economic deprivation. “Thus, targeting suboptimal care to areas of higher deprivation could help improve patient outcomes and address health inequities, with the additional benefit of reducing the overall carbon footprint of asthma care,” he said.

This coupling of optimized patient outcomes with environmental targets to decrease GHG emissions could be extended to other chronic progressive diseases, particularly those associated with multi-morbidities, the authors wrote.

Dr. Andy Whittamore, MBBS, clinical lead at Asthma + Lung UK, who was not involved in the research, said: “This study highlights that high levels of uncontrolled asthma not only put thousands of people at risk of life-threatening asthma attacks, but also have a detrimental effect on the environment. It’s important to point out that people shouldn’t stop taking their inhalers because they are worried about the environment. The best thing for the environment is to keep your asthma under control,” he emphasized.

Please refer to the study for full study author disclosures.Dr. Hicks has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape UK.

Asthma is not well controlled in about half of patients with the disease in the UK and Europe, increasing the risk of hospital admission and severe illness, and increasing healthcare costs. 

Now, the authors of a new study have reported that poorly controlled asthma is also associated with a higher carbon footprint, eight times higher than that of well-controlled asthma and equivalent to the greenhouse gas emissions produced by more than 124,000 homes each year in the UK.

The study was published in the journal Thorax and is part of the Healthcare-Based Environmental Cost of Treatment (CARBON) programme, which aims to provide a broader understanding of the carbon footprint associated with respiratory care. 

John Bell, BMBCh, medical director of BioPharmaceuticals Medical, AstraZeneca, and co-author of the study, said that he was surprised by the scale to which poorly controlled asthma contributed to the overall carbon footprint of asthma care. “This suggests that suboptimal asthma care is not just a public health issue, but also one which has environmental consequences,” he said.

Improving the care of asthma patients could help the NHS meet its net zero target, the authors suggested.
 

SABA – Largest Contributor to Asthma-Related Greenhouse Gases

Healthcare is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. In 2020, the NHS set an ambitious target of reducing its carbon footprint by 80% over the next 15 years, with the aim of reaching net zero by 2045.

To estimate the environmental footprint of asthma care in the UK, the researchers retrospectively analyzed anonymized data of 236,506 people with asthma submitted to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink between 2008 and 2019. 

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, measured as carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e), were then estimated for asthma-related medication use, healthcare resource utilization, and severe exacerbations.

Well-controlled asthma was considered as having no episodes of severe worsening symptoms and fewer than three prescriptions of short-acting beta-agonists (SABAs) reliever inhalers in a year. Poorly controlled asthma included three or more SABA canister prescriptions or one or more episodes of severe worsening symptoms in a year.

Almost one in two patients with asthma (47.3%) were categorized as being poorly controlled. 

The researchers estimated the overall carbon footprint attributed to asthma care when scaled to the entire UK asthma population was 750,540 tonnes CO2e/year, with poorly controlled asthma contributing to excess GHG emissions of 303,874 tonnes CO2e/year. 

“Poorly controlled asthma generated three-fold higher greenhouse gas emissions per capita compared with well-controlled asthma, when taking into account GHG emissions related to all aspects of asthma care, including routine prescribing and management,” Dr. Bell explained. It also generated eight-fold higher excess per capita carbon footprint compared to well-controlled asthma.

SABA relievers represented the largest contributors to per capita asthma-related GHG emissions, accounting for more than 60% of overall GHG emissions and more than 90% of excess GHG emissions. The remainder was mostly due to healthcare resource utilization, such as GP and hospital visits, required to treat severe worsening symptoms.

The researchers acknowledged various limitations to their findings, including that the study results were largely descriptive in nature. And factors other than the level of asthma symptom control, such as prescribing patterns, may also have contributed to high SABA use.
 

Couple Optimized Patient Outcomes With Environmental Targets

With inappropriate SABA use having emerged as the single largest contributor to asthma care-related GHG emissions, improving this care could achieve substantial carbon emissions savings and help the NHS meet its net zero target, the authors explained. 

This improvement could include the adoption of the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) treatment strategies that, since 2019, no longer recommends that SABAs are used alone as the preferred reliever for acute asthma symptoms, the authors wrote. 

However, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) asthma guidelines still recommend SABA alone as a reliever therapy.

On the other hand, the Primary Care Respiratory Society (PCRS) highlights on its website that the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) had approved the use of a dual (inhaled corticosteroid/formoterol) combination treatment to be used as a reliever therapy for people aged 12 and over.

“In the UK, this new therapy option does not yet sit within an approved national guideline as NICE last updated its treatment pathway in 2020. We await a new national asthma guideline but do not anticipate this new joint approach between NICE, BTS [British Thoracic Society], and SIGN [Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network] to publish until 2024,” the society wrote.

Dr. Bell explained that the carbon footprint of asthma care increased with higher socio-economic deprivation. “Thus, targeting suboptimal care to areas of higher deprivation could help improve patient outcomes and address health inequities, with the additional benefit of reducing the overall carbon footprint of asthma care,” he said.

This coupling of optimized patient outcomes with environmental targets to decrease GHG emissions could be extended to other chronic progressive diseases, particularly those associated with multi-morbidities, the authors wrote.

Dr. Andy Whittamore, MBBS, clinical lead at Asthma + Lung UK, who was not involved in the research, said: “This study highlights that high levels of uncontrolled asthma not only put thousands of people at risk of life-threatening asthma attacks, but also have a detrimental effect on the environment. It’s important to point out that people shouldn’t stop taking their inhalers because they are worried about the environment. The best thing for the environment is to keep your asthma under control,” he emphasized.

Please refer to the study for full study author disclosures.Dr. Hicks has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape UK.

Asthma is not well controlled in about half of patients with the disease in the UK and Europe, increasing the risk of hospital admission and severe illness, and increasing healthcare costs. 

Now, the authors of a new study have reported that poorly controlled asthma is also associated with a higher carbon footprint, eight times higher than that of well-controlled asthma and equivalent to the greenhouse gas emissions produced by more than 124,000 homes each year in the UK.

The study was published in the journal Thorax and is part of the Healthcare-Based Environmental Cost of Treatment (CARBON) programme, which aims to provide a broader understanding of the carbon footprint associated with respiratory care. 

John Bell, BMBCh, medical director of BioPharmaceuticals Medical, AstraZeneca, and co-author of the study, said that he was surprised by the scale to which poorly controlled asthma contributed to the overall carbon footprint of asthma care. “This suggests that suboptimal asthma care is not just a public health issue, but also one which has environmental consequences,” he said.

Improving the care of asthma patients could help the NHS meet its net zero target, the authors suggested.
 

SABA – Largest Contributor to Asthma-Related Greenhouse Gases

Healthcare is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. In 2020, the NHS set an ambitious target of reducing its carbon footprint by 80% over the next 15 years, with the aim of reaching net zero by 2045.

To estimate the environmental footprint of asthma care in the UK, the researchers retrospectively analyzed anonymized data of 236,506 people with asthma submitted to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink between 2008 and 2019. 

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, measured as carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e), were then estimated for asthma-related medication use, healthcare resource utilization, and severe exacerbations.

Well-controlled asthma was considered as having no episodes of severe worsening symptoms and fewer than three prescriptions of short-acting beta-agonists (SABAs) reliever inhalers in a year. Poorly controlled asthma included three or more SABA canister prescriptions or one or more episodes of severe worsening symptoms in a year.

Almost one in two patients with asthma (47.3%) were categorized as being poorly controlled. 

The researchers estimated the overall carbon footprint attributed to asthma care when scaled to the entire UK asthma population was 750,540 tonnes CO2e/year, with poorly controlled asthma contributing to excess GHG emissions of 303,874 tonnes CO2e/year. 

“Poorly controlled asthma generated three-fold higher greenhouse gas emissions per capita compared with well-controlled asthma, when taking into account GHG emissions related to all aspects of asthma care, including routine prescribing and management,” Dr. Bell explained. It also generated eight-fold higher excess per capita carbon footprint compared to well-controlled asthma.

SABA relievers represented the largest contributors to per capita asthma-related GHG emissions, accounting for more than 60% of overall GHG emissions and more than 90% of excess GHG emissions. The remainder was mostly due to healthcare resource utilization, such as GP and hospital visits, required to treat severe worsening symptoms.

The researchers acknowledged various limitations to their findings, including that the study results were largely descriptive in nature. And factors other than the level of asthma symptom control, such as prescribing patterns, may also have contributed to high SABA use.
 

Couple Optimized Patient Outcomes With Environmental Targets

With inappropriate SABA use having emerged as the single largest contributor to asthma care-related GHG emissions, improving this care could achieve substantial carbon emissions savings and help the NHS meet its net zero target, the authors explained. 

This improvement could include the adoption of the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) treatment strategies that, since 2019, no longer recommends that SABAs are used alone as the preferred reliever for acute asthma symptoms, the authors wrote. 

However, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) asthma guidelines still recommend SABA alone as a reliever therapy.

On the other hand, the Primary Care Respiratory Society (PCRS) highlights on its website that the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) had approved the use of a dual (inhaled corticosteroid/formoterol) combination treatment to be used as a reliever therapy for people aged 12 and over.

“In the UK, this new therapy option does not yet sit within an approved national guideline as NICE last updated its treatment pathway in 2020. We await a new national asthma guideline but do not anticipate this new joint approach between NICE, BTS [British Thoracic Society], and SIGN [Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network] to publish until 2024,” the society wrote.

Dr. Bell explained that the carbon footprint of asthma care increased with higher socio-economic deprivation. “Thus, targeting suboptimal care to areas of higher deprivation could help improve patient outcomes and address health inequities, with the additional benefit of reducing the overall carbon footprint of asthma care,” he said.

This coupling of optimized patient outcomes with environmental targets to decrease GHG emissions could be extended to other chronic progressive diseases, particularly those associated with multi-morbidities, the authors wrote.

Dr. Andy Whittamore, MBBS, clinical lead at Asthma + Lung UK, who was not involved in the research, said: “This study highlights that high levels of uncontrolled asthma not only put thousands of people at risk of life-threatening asthma attacks, but also have a detrimental effect on the environment. It’s important to point out that people shouldn’t stop taking their inhalers because they are worried about the environment. The best thing for the environment is to keep your asthma under control,” he emphasized.

Please refer to the study for full study author disclosures.Dr. Hicks has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape UK.

This transcript has been edited for clarity.

Hi. I’m Art Caplan, at the Division of Medical Ethics at New York University’s Grossman School of Medicine.

Very recently, a homeopathic midwife in New York was fined $300,000 for giving out phony injections for kids who were looking to get immunized in order to go to school. She gave pellets, which are sometimes called nosodes, I believe, with homeopathic ingredients, meaning next to nothing in them, and then basically certified that these children — and there were over 1500 of them — were compliant with New York State requirements to be vaccinated to go to school.

However, homeopathy is straight-up bunk. We have seen it again and again discredited as just something that doesn’t work. It has a tradition, but it’s basically nonsense. It certainly doesn’t work as a way to vaccinate anybody.

This midwife basically lied and gave phony certification to the parents of these kids. I’m not talking about the COVID-19 vaccine. I’m talking measles, mumps, rubella, flu, and polio — the childhood immunization schedule. For whatever reason, they put their faith in her and she went along with this fraud.

I think the fine is appropriate, but I think she should be penalized further. Why? When you send 1500 kids to school, mostly in Long Island, New York, but to schools all over the place, you are setting up conditions to bring back epidemic diseases like measles.

We’re already seeing measles outbreaks. At least five states have them. There’s a significant measles outbreak in Philadelphia. Although I can’t say for sure, I believe those outbreaks are directly linked to parents, post–COVID-19, becoming vaccine hesitant and either not vaccinating and lying or going to alternative practitioners like this midwife and claiming that they have been vaccinated.

You’re doing harm not only to the children who you allow to go to school under phony pretenses, but also you’re putting their classmates at risk. We all know that measles is very, very contagious. You’re risking the return of a disease that leads to hospitalization and sometimes even death. That is basically unconscionable.

I think her license should be taken away and she should not be practicing anymore. I believe that anyone who is involved in this kind of phony, dangerous, fraudulent practice ought to be severely punished.

Pre–COVID-19, we had just about gotten rid of measles and mumps. We didn’t see these diseases. Sometimes parents got a bit lazy in childhood vaccination basically because we had used immunization to get rid of the diseases.

Going to alternative healers and allowing people to get away with fraudulent nonsense risks bringing back disabling and deadly killers is not fair to you, me, and other people who are put at risk. It’s not fair to the kids who go to school with other kids who they think are vaccinated but aren’t.

I’m Art Caplan, at the Division of Medical Ethics at the New York University Grossman School of Medicine. Thanks for watching.

Arthur L. Caplan, PhD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships: Served as a director, officer, partner, employee, adviser, consultant, or trustee for Johnson & Johnson’s Panel for Compassionate Drug Use (unpaid position); serves as a contributing author and adviser for Medscape.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

This transcript has been edited for clarity.

Hi. I’m Art Caplan, at the Division of Medical Ethics at New York University’s Grossman School of Medicine.

Very recently, a homeopathic midwife in New York was fined $300,000 for giving out phony injections for kids who were looking to get immunized in order to go to school. She gave pellets, which are sometimes called nosodes, I believe, with homeopathic ingredients, meaning next to nothing in them, and then basically certified that these children — and there were over 1500 of them — were compliant with New York State requirements to be vaccinated to go to school.

However, homeopathy is straight-up bunk. We have seen it again and again discredited as just something that doesn’t work. It has a tradition, but it’s basically nonsense. It certainly doesn’t work as a way to vaccinate anybody.

This midwife basically lied and gave phony certification to the parents of these kids. I’m not talking about the COVID-19 vaccine. I’m talking measles, mumps, rubella, flu, and polio — the childhood immunization schedule. For whatever reason, they put their faith in her and she went along with this fraud.

I think the fine is appropriate, but I think she should be penalized further. Why? When you send 1500 kids to school, mostly in Long Island, New York, but to schools all over the place, you are setting up conditions to bring back epidemic diseases like measles.

We’re already seeing measles outbreaks. At least five states have them. There’s a significant measles outbreak in Philadelphia. Although I can’t say for sure, I believe those outbreaks are directly linked to parents, post–COVID-19, becoming vaccine hesitant and either not vaccinating and lying or going to alternative practitioners like this midwife and claiming that they have been vaccinated.

You’re doing harm not only to the children who you allow to go to school under phony pretenses, but also you’re putting their classmates at risk. We all know that measles is very, very contagious. You’re risking the return of a disease that leads to hospitalization and sometimes even death. That is basically unconscionable.

I think her license should be taken away and she should not be practicing anymore. I believe that anyone who is involved in this kind of phony, dangerous, fraudulent practice ought to be severely punished.

Pre–COVID-19, we had just about gotten rid of measles and mumps. We didn’t see these diseases. Sometimes parents got a bit lazy in childhood vaccination basically because we had used immunization to get rid of the diseases.

Going to alternative healers and allowing people to get away with fraudulent nonsense risks bringing back disabling and deadly killers is not fair to you, me, and other people who are put at risk. It’s not fair to the kids who go to school with other kids who they think are vaccinated but aren’t.

I’m Art Caplan, at the Division of Medical Ethics at the New York University Grossman School of Medicine. Thanks for watching.

Arthur L. Caplan, PhD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships: Served as a director, officer, partner, employee, adviser, consultant, or trustee for Johnson & Johnson’s Panel for Compassionate Drug Use (unpaid position); serves as a contributing author and adviser for Medscape.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

This transcript has been edited for clarity.

Hi. I’m Art Caplan, at the Division of Medical Ethics at New York University’s Grossman School of Medicine.

Very recently, a homeopathic midwife in New York was fined $300,000 for giving out phony injections for kids who were looking to get immunized in order to go to school. She gave pellets, which are sometimes called nosodes, I believe, with homeopathic ingredients, meaning next to nothing in them, and then basically certified that these children — and there were over 1500 of them — were compliant with New York State requirements to be vaccinated to go to school.

However, homeopathy is straight-up bunk. We have seen it again and again discredited as just something that doesn’t work. It has a tradition, but it’s basically nonsense. It certainly doesn’t work as a way to vaccinate anybody.

This midwife basically lied and gave phony certification to the parents of these kids. I’m not talking about the COVID-19 vaccine. I’m talking measles, mumps, rubella, flu, and polio — the childhood immunization schedule. For whatever reason, they put their faith in her and she went along with this fraud.

I think the fine is appropriate, but I think she should be penalized further. Why? When you send 1500 kids to school, mostly in Long Island, New York, but to schools all over the place, you are setting up conditions to bring back epidemic diseases like measles.

We’re already seeing measles outbreaks. At least five states have them. There’s a significant measles outbreak in Philadelphia. Although I can’t say for sure, I believe those outbreaks are directly linked to parents, post–COVID-19, becoming vaccine hesitant and either not vaccinating and lying or going to alternative practitioners like this midwife and claiming that they have been vaccinated.

You’re doing harm not only to the children who you allow to go to school under phony pretenses, but also you’re putting their classmates at risk. We all know that measles is very, very contagious. You’re risking the return of a disease that leads to hospitalization and sometimes even death. That is basically unconscionable.

I think her license should be taken away and she should not be practicing anymore. I believe that anyone who is involved in this kind of phony, dangerous, fraudulent practice ought to be severely punished.

Pre–COVID-19, we had just about gotten rid of measles and mumps. We didn’t see these diseases. Sometimes parents got a bit lazy in childhood vaccination basically because we had used immunization to get rid of the diseases.

Going to alternative healers and allowing people to get away with fraudulent nonsense risks bringing back disabling and deadly killers is not fair to you, me, and other people who are put at risk. It’s not fair to the kids who go to school with other kids who they think are vaccinated but aren’t.

I’m Art Caplan, at the Division of Medical Ethics at the New York University Grossman School of Medicine. Thanks for watching.

Arthur L. Caplan, PhD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships: Served as a director, officer, partner, employee, adviser, consultant, or trustee for Johnson & Johnson’s Panel for Compassionate Drug Use (unpaid position); serves as a contributing author and adviser for Medscape.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved letibotulinumtoxinA-wlbg, an injectable neurotoxin long used in South Korea for the treatment of moderate to severe glabellar (frown) lines in adults. Developed by Hugel, the product is being marketed under the brand name Letybo.

The FDA’s approval was based on positive results from three phase 3 trials of letibotulinumtoxinA-wlbg that enrolled more than 1000 individuals in the United States and Europe. According to information in the package insert, the most common adverse reaction reported in the trials was headache, which occurred in 2% of trial participants. Other adverse events reported by fewer than 1% of trial participants included brow ptosis, eyelid ptosis, and blepharospasm, while the most frequently reported injection site reactions included administrative site swelling, facial pain, folliculitis, and periorbital hematoma.

According to a press release from the company, letibotulinumtoxinA-wlbg has been the leading neurotoxin brand in South Korea for 7 consecutive years, and the product has been sold in more than 50 different countries. Hugel plans to launch Letybo for US-based aesthetic clinicians in the latter half of 2024.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved letibotulinumtoxinA-wlbg, an injectable neurotoxin long used in South Korea for the treatment of moderate to severe glabellar (frown) lines in adults. Developed by Hugel, the product is being marketed under the brand name Letybo.

The FDA’s approval was based on positive results from three phase 3 trials of letibotulinumtoxinA-wlbg that enrolled more than 1000 individuals in the United States and Europe. According to information in the package insert, the most common adverse reaction reported in the trials was headache, which occurred in 2% of trial participants. Other adverse events reported by fewer than 1% of trial participants included brow ptosis, eyelid ptosis, and blepharospasm, while the most frequently reported injection site reactions included administrative site swelling, facial pain, folliculitis, and periorbital hematoma.

According to a press release from the company, letibotulinumtoxinA-wlbg has been the leading neurotoxin brand in South Korea for 7 consecutive years, and the product has been sold in more than 50 different countries. Hugel plans to launch Letybo for US-based aesthetic clinicians in the latter half of 2024.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved letibotulinumtoxinA-wlbg, an injectable neurotoxin long used in South Korea for the treatment of moderate to severe glabellar (frown) lines in adults. Developed by Hugel, the product is being marketed under the brand name Letybo.

The FDA’s approval was based on positive results from three phase 3 trials of letibotulinumtoxinA-wlbg that enrolled more than 1000 individuals in the United States and Europe. According to information in the package insert, the most common adverse reaction reported in the trials was headache, which occurred in 2% of trial participants. Other adverse events reported by fewer than 1% of trial participants included brow ptosis, eyelid ptosis, and blepharospasm, while the most frequently reported injection site reactions included administrative site swelling, facial pain, folliculitis, and periorbital hematoma.

According to a press release from the company, letibotulinumtoxinA-wlbg has been the leading neurotoxin brand in South Korea for 7 consecutive years, and the product has been sold in more than 50 different countries. Hugel plans to launch Letybo for US-based aesthetic clinicians in the latter half of 2024.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

Treatment modifications, such as dose reductions, schedule changes, or use of less toxic regimens, can improve how well older patients with advanced cancer and aging-related conditions tolerate chemotherapy regimens.

METHODOLOGY:

• Older patients are underrepresented in clinical trials, which means the reported risks associated with standard-of-care regimens typically reflect outcomes in younger, healthier patients. This underrepresentation in clinical trials has also led to uncertainties about the safety of standard chemotherapy regimens in older patients who often have other health conditions to manage, alongside cancer.
• In this secondary analysis, researchers evaluated the association between primary treatment modifications to standard-of-care chemotherapy regimens and treatment tolerability.
• The trial included 609 patients aged ≥ 70 years who had advanced cancer alongside at least one age-related condition, such as impaired cognition, and planned to start a new palliative chemotherapy regimen in the community oncology setting. The most common cancer types were gastrointestinal cancer (37.4%) and lung cancer (28.6%).
• The primary outcome was grade 3-5 adverse events within 3 months of chemotherapy initiation.
• Secondary outcomes included patient-reported functional decline and combined adverse outcomes, which incorporated clinician-rated toxic effects, patient-reported functional decline, and 6-month overall survival.

TAKEAWAY: 

• Overall, 281 patients (46.1%) received a primary treatment modification, most often a dose reduction (71.9%) or a scheduling change (11.7%).
• Patients who received primary treatment modifications had a 15% lower risk for grades 3-5 adverse effects (relative risk [RR], 0.85) and a 20% lower risk for patient-reported functional decline (RR, 0.80) than those who received standard treatment.
• Patients receiving treatment modifications had 32% lower risk for a worse combined adverse outcome (odds ratio, 0.68).
• Cancer type may matter as well. When looking at outcomes by cancer type, patients with gastrointestinal cancers who received a primary treatment modification had a lower risk for toxic effects (RR, 0.82), whereas patients with lung cancer did not (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.88-1.20).

IN PRACTICE:

These findings “can help oncologists to choose the optimal drug regimen, select a safe and effective initial dose, and undertake appropriate monitoring strategies to manage the clinical care of older people with advanced cancer,” the authors said. 

SOURCE:

This study, led by Mostafa R. Mohamed from University of Rochester, New York, was published February 15 in JAMA Network Open.

LIMITATIONS: 

Residual confounding may be present. Extremely healthy older patients may have been excluded due to study criteria, limiting generalizability. There may be variation in toxicities due to inclusion of patients with multiple heterogeneous cancer.

DISCLOSURES:

This work was supported by the National Cancer Institute and the University of Rochester, New York. The authors disclosed financial relationships outside this work.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

Treatment modifications, such as dose reductions, schedule changes, or use of less toxic regimens, can improve how well older patients with advanced cancer and aging-related conditions tolerate chemotherapy regimens.

METHODOLOGY:

• Older patients are underrepresented in clinical trials, which means the reported risks associated with standard-of-care regimens typically reflect outcomes in younger, healthier patients. This underrepresentation in clinical trials has also led to uncertainties about the safety of standard chemotherapy regimens in older patients who often have other health conditions to manage, alongside cancer.
• In this secondary analysis, researchers evaluated the association between primary treatment modifications to standard-of-care chemotherapy regimens and treatment tolerability.
• The trial included 609 patients aged ≥ 70 years who had advanced cancer alongside at least one age-related condition, such as impaired cognition, and planned to start a new palliative chemotherapy regimen in the community oncology setting. The most common cancer types were gastrointestinal cancer (37.4%) and lung cancer (28.6%).
• The primary outcome was grade 3-5 adverse events within 3 months of chemotherapy initiation.
• Secondary outcomes included patient-reported functional decline and combined adverse outcomes, which incorporated clinician-rated toxic effects, patient-reported functional decline, and 6-month overall survival.

TAKEAWAY: 

• Overall, 281 patients (46.1%) received a primary treatment modification, most often a dose reduction (71.9%) or a scheduling change (11.7%).
• Patients who received primary treatment modifications had a 15% lower risk for grades 3-5 adverse effects (relative risk [RR], 0.85) and a 20% lower risk for patient-reported functional decline (RR, 0.80) than those who received standard treatment.
• Patients receiving treatment modifications had 32% lower risk for a worse combined adverse outcome (odds ratio, 0.68).
• Cancer type may matter as well. When looking at outcomes by cancer type, patients with gastrointestinal cancers who received a primary treatment modification had a lower risk for toxic effects (RR, 0.82), whereas patients with lung cancer did not (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.88-1.20).

IN PRACTICE:

These findings “can help oncologists to choose the optimal drug regimen, select a safe and effective initial dose, and undertake appropriate monitoring strategies to manage the clinical care of older people with advanced cancer,” the authors said. 

SOURCE:

This study, led by Mostafa R. Mohamed from University of Rochester, New York, was published February 15 in JAMA Network Open.

LIMITATIONS: 

Residual confounding may be present. Extremely healthy older patients may have been excluded due to study criteria, limiting generalizability. There may be variation in toxicities due to inclusion of patients with multiple heterogeneous cancer.

DISCLOSURES:

This work was supported by the National Cancer Institute and the University of Rochester, New York. The authors disclosed financial relationships outside this work.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

Treatment modifications, such as dose reductions, schedule changes, or use of less toxic regimens, can improve how well older patients with advanced cancer and aging-related conditions tolerate chemotherapy regimens.

METHODOLOGY:

• Older patients are underrepresented in clinical trials, which means the reported risks associated with standard-of-care regimens typically reflect outcomes in younger, healthier patients. This underrepresentation in clinical trials has also led to uncertainties about the safety of standard chemotherapy regimens in older patients who often have other health conditions to manage, alongside cancer.
• In this secondary analysis, researchers evaluated the association between primary treatment modifications to standard-of-care chemotherapy regimens and treatment tolerability.
• The trial included 609 patients aged ≥ 70 years who had advanced cancer alongside at least one age-related condition, such as impaired cognition, and planned to start a new palliative chemotherapy regimen in the community oncology setting. The most common cancer types were gastrointestinal cancer (37.4%) and lung cancer (28.6%).
• The primary outcome was grade 3-5 adverse events within 3 months of chemotherapy initiation.
• Secondary outcomes included patient-reported functional decline and combined adverse outcomes, which incorporated clinician-rated toxic effects, patient-reported functional decline, and 6-month overall survival.

TAKEAWAY: 

• Overall, 281 patients (46.1%) received a primary treatment modification, most often a dose reduction (71.9%) or a scheduling change (11.7%).
• Patients who received primary treatment modifications had a 15% lower risk for grades 3-5 adverse effects (relative risk [RR], 0.85) and a 20% lower risk for patient-reported functional decline (RR, 0.80) than those who received standard treatment.
• Patients receiving treatment modifications had 32% lower risk for a worse combined adverse outcome (odds ratio, 0.68).
• Cancer type may matter as well. When looking at outcomes by cancer type, patients with gastrointestinal cancers who received a primary treatment modification had a lower risk for toxic effects (RR, 0.82), whereas patients with lung cancer did not (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.88-1.20).

IN PRACTICE:

These findings “can help oncologists to choose the optimal drug regimen, select a safe and effective initial dose, and undertake appropriate monitoring strategies to manage the clinical care of older people with advanced cancer,” the authors said. 

SOURCE:

This study, led by Mostafa R. Mohamed from University of Rochester, New York, was published February 15 in JAMA Network Open.

LIMITATIONS: 

Residual confounding may be present. Extremely healthy older patients may have been excluded due to study criteria, limiting generalizability. There may be variation in toxicities due to inclusion of patients with multiple heterogeneous cancer.

DISCLOSURES:

This work was supported by the National Cancer Institute and the University of Rochester, New York. The authors disclosed financial relationships outside this work.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

Metformin cuts the risk for diabetic nephropathy (DN) and major kidney and cardiovascular events in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2D) across various renal function states.

METHODOLOGY:

Metformin is a first-line treatment in US and South Korean T2D management guidelines, except for patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) (stage, ≥ 4; estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR], < 30).

The study used data from the databases of three tertiary hospitals in South Korea to assess the effect of metformin on long-term renal and cardiovascular outcomes across various renal function states in patients with newly diagnosed T2D.

Four groups of treatment-control comparative cohorts were identified at each hospital: Patients who had not yet developed DN at T2D diagnosis (mean age in treatment and control cohorts, 61-65 years) and those with reduced renal function (CKD stages 3A, 3B, and 4).

Patients who continuously received metformin after T2D diagnosis and beyond the observation period were 1:1 propensity score matched with controls who were prescribed oral hypoglycemic agents other than metformin.

Primary outcomes were net major adverse cardiovascular events including strokes (MACEs) or in-hospital death and a composite of major adverse kidney events (MAKEs) or in-hospital death.

TAKEAWAY:

Among patients without DN at T2D diagnosis, the continuous use of metformin vs other oral hypoglycemic agents was associated with a lower risk for:

Overt DN (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71-0.95),

MACEs (IRR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64-0.92), and

MAKEs (IRR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.33-0.62).

Compared with non-metformin or discontinued metformin use, the continuous use of metformin was associated with a lower risk for MACE across CKD stages 3A (IRR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.57-0.87), 3B (IRR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74-0.93), and 4 (IRR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.60-0.85).

Similarly, the risk for MAKE was lower among continuous metformin users than in nonusers or discontinuous metformin users across CKD stage 3A (IRR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.35-0.43), 3B (IRR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.40-0.48), and 4 (IRR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.39-0.51).

IN PRACTICE:

“The significance of the current study is highlighted by its integration of real-world clinical data, which encompasses patients diagnosed with CDK4 [eGRF, 15-29 mL/min/1.73 m2], a group currently considered contraindicated,” the authors wrote.

SOURCE:

The study, led by Yongjin Yi, MD, PhD, Department of Internal Medicine, Dankook University College of Medicine, Cheonan-si, Republic of Korea, was published in Scientific Reports.

LIMITATIONS:

There may be a possibility of selection bias because of the retrospective and observational nature of this study. Despite achieving a 1:1 propensity score matching to address the confounding factors, some variables, such as serum albumin and A1c levels, remained unbalanced after matching. The paper did not include observation length or patient numbers, but in response to an email query from Medscape, Yi notes that in one hospital, the mean duration of observation for the control and treatment groups was about 6.5 years, and the total number in the treatment groups across data from three hospitals was 11,675, with the same number of matched controls.

DISCLOSURES:

This study was supported by a Young Investigator Research Grant from the Korean Society of Nephrology, a grant from the Seoul National University Bundang Hospital Research Fund, and the Bio&Medical Technology Development Program of the National Research Foundation funded by the Korean government. The authors disclosed no competing interests.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

Metformin cuts the risk for diabetic nephropathy (DN) and major kidney and cardiovascular events in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2D) across various renal function states.

METHODOLOGY:

Metformin is a first-line treatment in US and South Korean T2D management guidelines, except for patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) (stage, ≥ 4; estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR], < 30).

The study used data from the databases of three tertiary hospitals in South Korea to assess the effect of metformin on long-term renal and cardiovascular outcomes across various renal function states in patients with newly diagnosed T2D.

Four groups of treatment-control comparative cohorts were identified at each hospital: Patients who had not yet developed DN at T2D diagnosis (mean age in treatment and control cohorts, 61-65 years) and those with reduced renal function (CKD stages 3A, 3B, and 4).

Patients who continuously received metformin after T2D diagnosis and beyond the observation period were 1:1 propensity score matched with controls who were prescribed oral hypoglycemic agents other than metformin.

Primary outcomes were net major adverse cardiovascular events including strokes (MACEs) or in-hospital death and a composite of major adverse kidney events (MAKEs) or in-hospital death.

TAKEAWAY:

Among patients without DN at T2D diagnosis, the continuous use of metformin vs other oral hypoglycemic agents was associated with a lower risk for:

Overt DN (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71-0.95),

MACEs (IRR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64-0.92), and

MAKEs (IRR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.33-0.62).

Compared with non-metformin or discontinued metformin use, the continuous use of metformin was associated with a lower risk for MACE across CKD stages 3A (IRR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.57-0.87), 3B (IRR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74-0.93), and 4 (IRR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.60-0.85).

Similarly, the risk for MAKE was lower among continuous metformin users than in nonusers or discontinuous metformin users across CKD stage 3A (IRR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.35-0.43), 3B (IRR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.40-0.48), and 4 (IRR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.39-0.51).

IN PRACTICE:

“The significance of the current study is highlighted by its integration of real-world clinical data, which encompasses patients diagnosed with CDK4 [eGRF, 15-29 mL/min/1.73 m2], a group currently considered contraindicated,” the authors wrote.

SOURCE:

The study, led by Yongjin Yi, MD, PhD, Department of Internal Medicine, Dankook University College of Medicine, Cheonan-si, Republic of Korea, was published in Scientific Reports.

LIMITATIONS:

There may be a possibility of selection bias because of the retrospective and observational nature of this study. Despite achieving a 1:1 propensity score matching to address the confounding factors, some variables, such as serum albumin and A1c levels, remained unbalanced after matching. The paper did not include observation length or patient numbers, but in response to an email query from Medscape, Yi notes that in one hospital, the mean duration of observation for the control and treatment groups was about 6.5 years, and the total number in the treatment groups across data from three hospitals was 11,675, with the same number of matched controls.

DISCLOSURES:

This study was supported by a Young Investigator Research Grant from the Korean Society of Nephrology, a grant from the Seoul National University Bundang Hospital Research Fund, and the Bio&Medical Technology Development Program of the National Research Foundation funded by the Korean government. The authors disclosed no competing interests.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

TOPLINE:

Metformin cuts the risk for diabetic nephropathy (DN) and major kidney and cardiovascular events in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2D) across various renal function states.

METHODOLOGY:

Metformin is a first-line treatment in US and South Korean T2D management guidelines, except for patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) (stage, ≥ 4; estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR], < 30).

The study used data from the databases of three tertiary hospitals in South Korea to assess the effect of metformin on long-term renal and cardiovascular outcomes across various renal function states in patients with newly diagnosed T2D.

Four groups of treatment-control comparative cohorts were identified at each hospital: Patients who had not yet developed DN at T2D diagnosis (mean age in treatment and control cohorts, 61-65 years) and those with reduced renal function (CKD stages 3A, 3B, and 4).

Patients who continuously received metformin after T2D diagnosis and beyond the observation period were 1:1 propensity score matched with controls who were prescribed oral hypoglycemic agents other than metformin.

Primary outcomes were net major adverse cardiovascular events including strokes (MACEs) or in-hospital death and a composite of major adverse kidney events (MAKEs) or in-hospital death.

TAKEAWAY:

Among patients without DN at T2D diagnosis, the continuous use of metformin vs other oral hypoglycemic agents was associated with a lower risk for:

Overt DN (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71-0.95),

MACEs (IRR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64-0.92), and

MAKEs (IRR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.33-0.62).

Compared with non-metformin or discontinued metformin use, the continuous use of metformin was associated with a lower risk for MACE across CKD stages 3A (IRR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.57-0.87), 3B (IRR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74-0.93), and 4 (IRR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.60-0.85).

Similarly, the risk for MAKE was lower among continuous metformin users than in nonusers or discontinuous metformin users across CKD stage 3A (IRR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.35-0.43), 3B (IRR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.40-0.48), and 4 (IRR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.39-0.51).

IN PRACTICE:

“The significance of the current study is highlighted by its integration of real-world clinical data, which encompasses patients diagnosed with CDK4 [eGRF, 15-29 mL/min/1.73 m2], a group currently considered contraindicated,” the authors wrote.

SOURCE:

The study, led by Yongjin Yi, MD, PhD, Department of Internal Medicine, Dankook University College of Medicine, Cheonan-si, Republic of Korea, was published in Scientific Reports.

LIMITATIONS:

There may be a possibility of selection bias because of the retrospective and observational nature of this study. Despite achieving a 1:1 propensity score matching to address the confounding factors, some variables, such as serum albumin and A1c levels, remained unbalanced after matching. The paper did not include observation length or patient numbers, but in response to an email query from Medscape, Yi notes that in one hospital, the mean duration of observation for the control and treatment groups was about 6.5 years, and the total number in the treatment groups across data from three hospitals was 11,675, with the same number of matched controls.

DISCLOSURES:

This study was supported by a Young Investigator Research Grant from the Korean Society of Nephrology, a grant from the Seoul National University Bundang Hospital Research Fund, and the Bio&Medical Technology Development Program of the National Research Foundation funded by the Korean government. The authors disclosed no competing interests.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

The risk of developing a new autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic disease (AIRD) is greater following a COVID-19 infection than after an influenza infection or in the general population, according to a study published March 5 in Annals of Internal Medicine. More severe COVID-19 infections were linked to a greater risk of incident rheumatic disease, but vaccination appeared protective against development of a new AIRD.

“Importantly, this study shows the value of vaccination to prevent severe disease and these types of sequelae,” Anne Davidson, MBBS, a professor in the Institute of Molecular Medicine at The Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research in Manhasset, New York, who was not involved in the study, said in an interview.

More Robust and Rigorous Research

Past cohort studies finding an increased risk of rheumatic disease after COVID-19 “based their findings solely on comparisons between infected and uninfected groups, which could be influenced by ascertainment bias due to disparities in care, differences in health-seeking tendencies, and inherent risks among the groups,” Min Seo Kim, MD, of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and his colleagues reported. Their study, however, required at least two claims with codes for rheumatic disease and compared patients with COVID-19 to those with flu “to adjust for the potentially heightened detection of AIRD in SARS-CoV-2–infected persons owing to their interactions with the health care system.”

Dr. Alfred Kim said the fact that they used at least two claims codes “gives a little more credence that the patients were actually experiencing some sort of autoimmune inflammatory condition as opposed to a very transient issue post COVID that just went away on its own.”

He acknowledged that the previous research was reasonably strong, “especially in light of the fact that there has been so much work done on a molecular level demonstrating that COVID-19 is associated with a substantial increase in autoantibodies in a significant proportion of patients, so this always opened up the possibility that this could associate with some sort of autoimmune disease downstream.”

While the study is well done with a large population, “it still has limitations that might overestimate the effect,” Kevin W. Byram, MD, associate professor of medicine in rheumatology and immunology at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee, who was not involved in the study, said in an interview. “We certainly have seen individual cases of new rheumatic disease where COVID-19 infection is likely the trigger,” but the phenomenon is not new, he added.

“Many autoimmune diseases are spurred by a loss of tolerance that might be induced by a pathogen of some sort,” Dr. Byram said. “The study is right to point out different forms of bias that might be at play. One in particular that is important to consider in a study like this is the lack of case-level adjudication regarding the diagnosis of rheumatic disease” since the study relied on available ICD-10 codes and medication prescriptions.

Risk Varied With Disease Severity and Vaccination Status

Among the Korean patients, 3.9% had a COVID-19 infection and 0.98% had an influenza infection. After matching, the comparison populations included 94,504 patients with COVID-19 versus 94,504 patients with flu, and 177,083 patients with COVID-19 versus 675,750 uninfected controls.

The risk of developing an AIRD at least 1 month after infection in South Korean patients with COVID-19 was 25% higher than in uninfected control participants (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.25; 95% CI, 1.18–1.31; P < .05) and 30% higher than in influenza patients (aHR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.02–1.59; P < .05). Specifically, risk in South Korean patients with COVID-19 was significantly increased for connective tissue disease and both treated and untreated AIRD but not for inflammatory arthritis.

Among the Japanese patients, 8.2% had COVID-19 and 0.99% had flu, resulting in matched populations of 115,003 with COVID-19 versus 110,310 with flu, and 960,849 with COVID-19 versus 1,606,873 uninfected patients. The effect size was larger in Japanese patients, with a 79% increased risk for AIRD in patients with COVID-19, compared with the general population (aHR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.77–1.82; P < .05) and a 14% increased risk, compared with patients with influenza infection (aHR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.10–1.17; P < .05). In Japanese patients, risk was increased across all four categories, including a doubled risk for inflammatory arthritis (aHR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.96–2.07; P < .05), compared with the general population.

The researchers had data only from the South Korean cohort to calculate risk based on vaccination status, SARS-CoV-2 variant (wild type versus Delta), and COVID-19 severity. Researchers determined a COVID-19 infection to be moderate-to-severe based on billing codes for ICU admission or requiring oxygen therapy, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, renal replacement, or CPR.

Infection with both the original strain and the Delta variant were linked to similar increased risks for AIRD, but moderate to severe COVID-19 infections had greater risk of subsequent AIRD (aHR, 1.42; P < .05) than mild infections (aHR, 1.22; P < .05). Vaccination was linked to a lower risk of AIRD within the COVID-19 patient population: One dose was linked to a 41% reduced risk (HR, 0.59; P < .05) and two doses were linked to a 58% reduced risk (HR, 0.42; P < .05), regardless of the vaccine type, compared with unvaccinated patients with COVID-19. The apparent protective effect of vaccination was true only for patients with mild COVID-19, not those with moderate to severe infection.

“One has to wonder whether or not these people were at much higher risk of developing autoimmune disease that just got exposed because they got COVID, so that a fraction of these would have gotten an autoimmune disease downstream,” Dr. Alfred Kim said. Regardless, one clinical implication of the findings is the reduced risk in vaccinated patients, regardless of the vaccine type, given the fact that “mRNA vaccination in particular has not been associated with any autoantibody development,” he said.

Though the correlations in the study cannot translate to causation, several mechanisms might be at play in a viral infection contributing to autoimmune risk, Dr. Davidson said. Given that viral nucleic acids also recognize self-nucleic acids, “a large load of viral nucleic acid may break tolerance,” or “viral proteins could also mimic self-proteins,” she said. “In addition, tolerance may be broken by a highly inflammatory environment associated with the release of cytokines and other inflammatory mediators.”

The association between new-onset autoimmune disease and severe COVID-19 infection suggests multiple mechanisms may be involved in excess immune stimulation, Dr. Davidson said. But she added that it’s unclear how these findings, involving the original strain and Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, might relate to currently circulating variants.

The research was funded by the National Research Foundation of Korea, the Korea Health Industry Development Institute, and the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety of the Republic of Korea. The authors reported no relevant financial relationships with industry. Dr. Alfred Kim has sponsored research agreements with AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Novartis; receives royalties from a patent with Kypha Inc.; and has done consulting or speaking for Amgen, ANI Pharmaceuticals, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Exagen Diagnostics, GlaxoSmithKline, Kypha, Miltenyi Biotech, Pfizer, Rheumatology & Arthritis Learning Network, Synthekine, Techtonic Therapeutics, and UpToDate. Dr. Byram reported consulting for TenSixteen Bio. Dr. Davidson had no disclosures.

The risk of developing a new autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic disease (AIRD) is greater following a COVID-19 infection than after an influenza infection or in the general population, according to a study published March 5 in Annals of Internal Medicine. More severe COVID-19 infections were linked to a greater risk of incident rheumatic disease, but vaccination appeared protective against development of a new AIRD.

“Importantly, this study shows the value of vaccination to prevent severe disease and these types of sequelae,” Anne Davidson, MBBS, a professor in the Institute of Molecular Medicine at The Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research in Manhasset, New York, who was not involved in the study, said in an interview.

More Robust and Rigorous Research

Past cohort studies finding an increased risk of rheumatic disease after COVID-19 “based their findings solely on comparisons between infected and uninfected groups, which could be influenced by ascertainment bias due to disparities in care, differences in health-seeking tendencies, and inherent risks among the groups,” Min Seo Kim, MD, of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and his colleagues reported. Their study, however, required at least two claims with codes for rheumatic disease and compared patients with COVID-19 to those with flu “to adjust for the potentially heightened detection of AIRD in SARS-CoV-2–infected persons owing to their interactions with the health care system.”

Dr. Alfred Kim said the fact that they used at least two claims codes “gives a little more credence that the patients were actually experiencing some sort of autoimmune inflammatory condition as opposed to a very transient issue post COVID that just went away on its own.”

He acknowledged that the previous research was reasonably strong, “especially in light of the fact that there has been so much work done on a molecular level demonstrating that COVID-19 is associated with a substantial increase in autoantibodies in a significant proportion of patients, so this always opened up the possibility that this could associate with some sort of autoimmune disease downstream.”

While the study is well done with a large population, “it still has limitations that might overestimate the effect,” Kevin W. Byram, MD, associate professor of medicine in rheumatology and immunology at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee, who was not involved in the study, said in an interview. “We certainly have seen individual cases of new rheumatic disease where COVID-19 infection is likely the trigger,” but the phenomenon is not new, he added.

“Many autoimmune diseases are spurred by a loss of tolerance that might be induced by a pathogen of some sort,” Dr. Byram said. “The study is right to point out different forms of bias that might be at play. One in particular that is important to consider in a study like this is the lack of case-level adjudication regarding the diagnosis of rheumatic disease” since the study relied on available ICD-10 codes and medication prescriptions.

Risk Varied With Disease Severity and Vaccination Status

Among the Korean patients, 3.9% had a COVID-19 infection and 0.98% had an influenza infection. After matching, the comparison populations included 94,504 patients with COVID-19 versus 94,504 patients with flu, and 177,083 patients with COVID-19 versus 675,750 uninfected controls.

The risk of developing an AIRD at least 1 month after infection in South Korean patients with COVID-19 was 25% higher than in uninfected control participants (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.25; 95% CI, 1.18–1.31; P < .05) and 30% higher than in influenza patients (aHR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.02–1.59; P < .05). Specifically, risk in South Korean patients with COVID-19 was significantly increased for connective tissue disease and both treated and untreated AIRD but not for inflammatory arthritis.

Among the Japanese patients, 8.2% had COVID-19 and 0.99% had flu, resulting in matched populations of 115,003 with COVID-19 versus 110,310 with flu, and 960,849 with COVID-19 versus 1,606,873 uninfected patients. The effect size was larger in Japanese patients, with a 79% increased risk for AIRD in patients with COVID-19, compared with the general population (aHR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.77–1.82; P < .05) and a 14% increased risk, compared with patients with influenza infection (aHR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.10–1.17; P < .05). In Japanese patients, risk was increased across all four categories, including a doubled risk for inflammatory arthritis (aHR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.96–2.07; P < .05), compared with the general population.

The researchers had data only from the South Korean cohort to calculate risk based on vaccination status, SARS-CoV-2 variant (wild type versus Delta), and COVID-19 severity. Researchers determined a COVID-19 infection to be moderate-to-severe based on billing codes for ICU admission or requiring oxygen therapy, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, renal replacement, or CPR.

Infection with both the original strain and the Delta variant were linked to similar increased risks for AIRD, but moderate to severe COVID-19 infections had greater risk of subsequent AIRD (aHR, 1.42; P < .05) than mild infections (aHR, 1.22; P < .05). Vaccination was linked to a lower risk of AIRD within the COVID-19 patient population: One dose was linked to a 41% reduced risk (HR, 0.59; P < .05) and two doses were linked to a 58% reduced risk (HR, 0.42; P < .05), regardless of the vaccine type, compared with unvaccinated patients with COVID-19. The apparent protective effect of vaccination was true only for patients with mild COVID-19, not those with moderate to severe infection.

“One has to wonder whether or not these people were at much higher risk of developing autoimmune disease that just got exposed because they got COVID, so that a fraction of these would have gotten an autoimmune disease downstream,” Dr. Alfred Kim said. Regardless, one clinical implication of the findings is the reduced risk in vaccinated patients, regardless of the vaccine type, given the fact that “mRNA vaccination in particular has not been associated with any autoantibody development,” he said.

Though the correlations in the study cannot translate to causation, several mechanisms might be at play in a viral infection contributing to autoimmune risk, Dr. Davidson said. Given that viral nucleic acids also recognize self-nucleic acids, “a large load of viral nucleic acid may break tolerance,” or “viral proteins could also mimic self-proteins,” she said. “In addition, tolerance may be broken by a highly inflammatory environment associated with the release of cytokines and other inflammatory mediators.”

The association between new-onset autoimmune disease and severe COVID-19 infection suggests multiple mechanisms may be involved in excess immune stimulation, Dr. Davidson said. But she added that it’s unclear how these findings, involving the original strain and Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, might relate to currently circulating variants.

The research was funded by the National Research Foundation of Korea, the Korea Health Industry Development Institute, and the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety of the Republic of Korea. The authors reported no relevant financial relationships with industry. Dr. Alfred Kim has sponsored research agreements with AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Novartis; receives royalties from a patent with Kypha Inc.; and has done consulting or speaking for Amgen, ANI Pharmaceuticals, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Exagen Diagnostics, GlaxoSmithKline, Kypha, Miltenyi Biotech, Pfizer, Rheumatology & Arthritis Learning Network, Synthekine, Techtonic Therapeutics, and UpToDate. Dr. Byram reported consulting for TenSixteen Bio. Dr. Davidson had no disclosures.

The risk of developing a new autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic disease (AIRD) is greater following a COVID-19 infection than after an influenza infection or in the general population, according to a study published March 5 in Annals of Internal Medicine. More severe COVID-19 infections were linked to a greater risk of incident rheumatic disease, but vaccination appeared protective against development of a new AIRD.

“Importantly, this study shows the value of vaccination to prevent severe disease and these types of sequelae,” Anne Davidson, MBBS, a professor in the Institute of Molecular Medicine at The Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research in Manhasset, New York, who was not involved in the study, said in an interview.

More Robust and Rigorous Research

Past cohort studies finding an increased risk of rheumatic disease after COVID-19 “based their findings solely on comparisons between infected and uninfected groups, which could be influenced by ascertainment bias due to disparities in care, differences in health-seeking tendencies, and inherent risks among the groups,” Min Seo Kim, MD, of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and his colleagues reported. Their study, however, required at least two claims with codes for rheumatic disease and compared patients with COVID-19 to those with flu “to adjust for the potentially heightened detection of AIRD in SARS-CoV-2–infected persons owing to their interactions with the health care system.”

Dr. Alfred Kim said the fact that they used at least two claims codes “gives a little more credence that the patients were actually experiencing some sort of autoimmune inflammatory condition as opposed to a very transient issue post COVID that just went away on its own.”

He acknowledged that the previous research was reasonably strong, “especially in light of the fact that there has been so much work done on a molecular level demonstrating that COVID-19 is associated with a substantial increase in autoantibodies in a significant proportion of patients, so this always opened up the possibility that this could associate with some sort of autoimmune disease downstream.”

While the study is well done with a large population, “it still has limitations that might overestimate the effect,” Kevin W. Byram, MD, associate professor of medicine in rheumatology and immunology at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee, who was not involved in the study, said in an interview. “We certainly have seen individual cases of new rheumatic disease where COVID-19 infection is likely the trigger,” but the phenomenon is not new, he added.

“Many autoimmune diseases are spurred by a loss of tolerance that might be induced by a pathogen of some sort,” Dr. Byram said. “The study is right to point out different forms of bias that might be at play. One in particular that is important to consider in a study like this is the lack of case-level adjudication regarding the diagnosis of rheumatic disease” since the study relied on available ICD-10 codes and medication prescriptions.

Risk Varied With Disease Severity and Vaccination Status

Among the Korean patients, 3.9% had a COVID-19 infection and 0.98% had an influenza infection. After matching, the comparison populations included 94,504 patients with COVID-19 versus 94,504 patients with flu, and 177,083 patients with COVID-19 versus 675,750 uninfected controls.

The risk of developing an AIRD at least 1 month after infection in South Korean patients with COVID-19 was 25% higher than in uninfected control participants (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.25; 95% CI, 1.18–1.31; P < .05) and 30% higher than in influenza patients (aHR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.02–1.59; P < .05). Specifically, risk in South Korean patients with COVID-19 was significantly increased for connective tissue disease and both treated and untreated AIRD but not for inflammatory arthritis.

Among the Japanese patients, 8.2% had COVID-19 and 0.99% had flu, resulting in matched populations of 115,003 with COVID-19 versus 110,310 with flu, and 960,849 with COVID-19 versus 1,606,873 uninfected patients. The effect size was larger in Japanese patients, with a 79% increased risk for AIRD in patients with COVID-19, compared with the general population (aHR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.77–1.82; P < .05) and a 14% increased risk, compared with patients with influenza infection (aHR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.10–1.17; P < .05). In Japanese patients, risk was increased across all four categories, including a doubled risk for inflammatory arthritis (aHR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.96–2.07; P < .05), compared with the general population.

The researchers had data only from the South Korean cohort to calculate risk based on vaccination status, SARS-CoV-2 variant (wild type versus Delta), and COVID-19 severity. Researchers determined a COVID-19 infection to be moderate-to-severe based on billing codes for ICU admission or requiring oxygen therapy, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, renal replacement, or CPR.

Infection with both the original strain and the Delta variant were linked to similar increased risks for AIRD, but moderate to severe COVID-19 infections had greater risk of subsequent AIRD (aHR, 1.42; P < .05) than mild infections (aHR, 1.22; P < .05). Vaccination was linked to a lower risk of AIRD within the COVID-19 patient population: One dose was linked to a 41% reduced risk (HR, 0.59; P < .05) and two doses were linked to a 58% reduced risk (HR, 0.42; P < .05), regardless of the vaccine type, compared with unvaccinated patients with COVID-19. The apparent protective effect of vaccination was true only for patients with mild COVID-19, not those with moderate to severe infection.

“One has to wonder whether or not these people were at much higher risk of developing autoimmune disease that just got exposed because they got COVID, so that a fraction of these would have gotten an autoimmune disease downstream,” Dr. Alfred Kim said. Regardless, one clinical implication of the findings is the reduced risk in vaccinated patients, regardless of the vaccine type, given the fact that “mRNA vaccination in particular has not been associated with any autoantibody development,” he said.

Though the correlations in the study cannot translate to causation, several mechanisms might be at play in a viral infection contributing to autoimmune risk, Dr. Davidson said. Given that viral nucleic acids also recognize self-nucleic acids, “a large load of viral nucleic acid may break tolerance,” or “viral proteins could also mimic self-proteins,” she said. “In addition, tolerance may be broken by a highly inflammatory environment associated with the release of cytokines and other inflammatory mediators.”

The association between new-onset autoimmune disease and severe COVID-19 infection suggests multiple mechanisms may be involved in excess immune stimulation, Dr. Davidson said. But she added that it’s unclear how these findings, involving the original strain and Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, might relate to currently circulating variants.

The research was funded by the National Research Foundation of Korea, the Korea Health Industry Development Institute, and the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety of the Republic of Korea. The authors reported no relevant financial relationships with industry. Dr. Alfred Kim has sponsored research agreements with AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Novartis; receives royalties from a patent with Kypha Inc.; and has done consulting or speaking for Amgen, ANI Pharmaceuticals, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Exagen Diagnostics, GlaxoSmithKline, Kypha, Miltenyi Biotech, Pfizer, Rheumatology & Arthritis Learning Network, Synthekine, Techtonic Therapeutics, and UpToDate. Dr. Byram reported consulting for TenSixteen Bio. Dr. Davidson had no disclosures.

The Diagnosis: Gastric Acid Dermatitis

After further discussion, the patient indicated that he had vomited during the night of alcohol consumption, and the vomitus remained on the affected areas until the next morning, indicating that excessive alcohol ingestion stimulated abundant secretion of gastric acid, which caused the symptoms. Additionally, the presence of clothing acted as a buffer in the unaffected areas, which helped make the final diagnosis of gastric acid dermatitis. The patient was treated with external application of recombinant bovine basic fibroblast growth factor gel (21,000 IU/5 g) once daily, and the lesions greatly improved within 7 days. The burning pain of the throat, stomach, and esophagus resolved after consultation with an otolaryngologist and a gastroenterologist.

Gastric acid dermatitis is a new term used to describe an acute skin burn caused by the patient's own gastric acid. Generally, the pH of human gastric acid is between 0.9 and 1.8 but will be diluted after eating and will gradually increase to approximately 3.5, which is not enough to induce burns on the skin.¹ In addition, the skin barrier is capable of preventing transient gastric acid corrosion.^2,3 However, the release of a large amount of gastric acid after excessive alcohol ingestion coupled with 1 night of lethargy left enough acid and time to induce skin burns in our patient.

Dermatitis caused by other allergic or chemical factors, such as Paederus dermatitis, was excluded, as the patient’s manifestation occurred during the inactive period of Paederus fuscipes. Furthermore, the patient denied any history of contact with chemicals in the last month. Food eruptions primarily manifest as systemic anaphylaxis with eruptive and pruritic rashes after consumption of seafood, eggs, milk, or other proteins, while alcoholic contact dermatitis is a form of irritating dermatitis that could be easily induced again by direct skin contact with alcohol.

Management of gastric acid dermatitis is similar to that for other chemical burns. Because scarring seldom occurs, the central issue is to restore the skin barrier as quickly as possible and to avoid or alleviate postinflammatory hyperpigmentation. Treatments to restore the skin barrier include recombinant bovine or human-derived basic fibroblast growth factor gel, moist exposed burn ointment, and medical sodium hyaluronate gelatin. To treat postinflammatory hyperpigmentation, some whitening agents such as compound superoxide dismutase arbutin cream and hydroquinone cream as well as the Q-switched Nd:YAG laser are effective to ameliorate the skin condition. If skin burns are on sun-exposed areas, photoprotection is necessary to prevent hyperpigmentation.

Acknowledgment—We thank the patient for granting permission to publish this information.

The Diagnosis: Gastric Acid Dermatitis

After further discussion, the patient indicated that he had vomited during the night of alcohol consumption, and the vomitus remained on the affected areas until the next morning, indicating that excessive alcohol ingestion stimulated abundant secretion of gastric acid, which caused the symptoms. Additionally, the presence of clothing acted as a buffer in the unaffected areas, which helped make the final diagnosis of gastric acid dermatitis. The patient was treated with external application of recombinant bovine basic fibroblast growth factor gel (21,000 IU/5 g) once daily, and the lesions greatly improved within 7 days. The burning pain of the throat, stomach, and esophagus resolved after consultation with an otolaryngologist and a gastroenterologist.

Gastric acid dermatitis is a new term used to describe an acute skin burn caused by the patient's own gastric acid. Generally, the pH of human gastric acid is between 0.9 and 1.8 but will be diluted after eating and will gradually increase to approximately 3.5, which is not enough to induce burns on the skin.¹ In addition, the skin barrier is capable of preventing transient gastric acid corrosion.^2,3 However, the release of a large amount of gastric acid after excessive alcohol ingestion coupled with 1 night of lethargy left enough acid and time to induce skin burns in our patient.

Dermatitis caused by other allergic or chemical factors, such as Paederus dermatitis, was excluded, as the patient’s manifestation occurred during the inactive period of Paederus fuscipes. Furthermore, the patient denied any history of contact with chemicals in the last month. Food eruptions primarily manifest as systemic anaphylaxis with eruptive and pruritic rashes after consumption of seafood, eggs, milk, or other proteins, while alcoholic contact dermatitis is a form of irritating dermatitis that could be easily induced again by direct skin contact with alcohol.

Management of gastric acid dermatitis is similar to that for other chemical burns. Because scarring seldom occurs, the central issue is to restore the skin barrier as quickly as possible and to avoid or alleviate postinflammatory hyperpigmentation. Treatments to restore the skin barrier include recombinant bovine or human-derived basic fibroblast growth factor gel, moist exposed burn ointment, and medical sodium hyaluronate gelatin. To treat postinflammatory hyperpigmentation, some whitening agents such as compound superoxide dismutase arbutin cream and hydroquinone cream as well as the Q-switched Nd:YAG laser are effective to ameliorate the skin condition. If skin burns are on sun-exposed areas, photoprotection is necessary to prevent hyperpigmentation.

Acknowledgment—We thank the patient for granting permission to publish this information.

The Diagnosis: Gastric Acid Dermatitis

After further discussion, the patient indicated that he had vomited during the night of alcohol consumption, and the vomitus remained on the affected areas until the next morning, indicating that excessive alcohol ingestion stimulated abundant secretion of gastric acid, which caused the symptoms. Additionally, the presence of clothing acted as a buffer in the unaffected areas, which helped make the final diagnosis of gastric acid dermatitis. The patient was treated with external application of recombinant bovine basic fibroblast growth factor gel (21,000 IU/5 g) once daily, and the lesions greatly improved within 7 days. The burning pain of the throat, stomach, and esophagus resolved after consultation with an otolaryngologist and a gastroenterologist.

Gastric acid dermatitis is a new term used to describe an acute skin burn caused by the patient's own gastric acid. Generally, the pH of human gastric acid is between 0.9 and 1.8 but will be diluted after eating and will gradually increase to approximately 3.5, which is not enough to induce burns on the skin.¹ In addition, the skin barrier is capable of preventing transient gastric acid corrosion.^2,3 However, the release of a large amount of gastric acid after excessive alcohol ingestion coupled with 1 night of lethargy left enough acid and time to induce skin burns in our patient.

Dermatitis caused by other allergic or chemical factors, such as Paederus dermatitis, was excluded, as the patient’s manifestation occurred during the inactive period of Paederus fuscipes. Furthermore, the patient denied any history of contact with chemicals in the last month. Food eruptions primarily manifest as systemic anaphylaxis with eruptive and pruritic rashes after consumption of seafood, eggs, milk, or other proteins, while alcoholic contact dermatitis is a form of irritating dermatitis that could be easily induced again by direct skin contact with alcohol.

Management of gastric acid dermatitis is similar to that for other chemical burns. Because scarring seldom occurs, the central issue is to restore the skin barrier as quickly as possible and to avoid or alleviate postinflammatory hyperpigmentation. Treatments to restore the skin barrier include recombinant bovine or human-derived basic fibroblast growth factor gel, moist exposed burn ointment, and medical sodium hyaluronate gelatin. To treat postinflammatory hyperpigmentation, some whitening agents such as compound superoxide dismutase arbutin cream and hydroquinone cream as well as the Q-switched Nd:YAG laser are effective to ameliorate the skin condition. If skin burns are on sun-exposed areas, photoprotection is necessary to prevent hyperpigmentation.

Acknowledgment—We thank the patient for granting permission to publish this information.

Photographs courtesy of Richard P. Usatine, MD.

THE COMPARISON

A Melanoma in situ manifesting as longitudinal melanonychia (LM) in a single digit in a Black man. Dermoscopy showed irregular dark bands of brown pigmentation and micro-Hutchinson sign on the cuticle (inset).

B Melanoma manifesting as LM with a prominent Hutchinson sign in a Hispanic man, with variable shades of brown covering more than 50% of the nail width.

C Longitudinal melanonychia of at least 2 nails with a pseudo-Hutchinson sign (pigment on the nail folds in a benign case of LM) in a young Black man demonstrating ethnic/racial melanosis. The longitudinal bands, which were caused by benign melanocytic activation, are more gray than brown and are less than 3 mm wide.

Longitudinal melanonychia (LM) is a pigmented linear band—brown, black, or gray—spanning the length of the nail plate due to the presence of excess melanin, which may be attributed to a benign or malignant process and may warrant further investigation.^1,2 The majority of patients who present with LM are diagnosed with melanocytic activation of the nail matrix due to their inherent darker skin tone or various triggers including trauma, infection, and medications. Longitudinal melanonychia secondary to melanocytic activation often occurs spontaneously in patients with skin of color.³ Less commonly, LM is caused by a nail matrix nevus or lentigo; however, LM may arise secondary to subungual melanoma, a more dangerous cause.

A thorough clinical history including duration, recent changes in LM manifestation, nail trauma, or infection is helpful in evaluating patients with LM; however, a history of nail trauma can be misleading, as nail changes attributed to the trauma may in fact be melanoma. Irregularly spaced vertical lines of pigmentation ranging from brown to black with variations in spacing and width are characteristic of subungual melanoma.⁴ Nail dystrophy, granular hyperpigmentation, and Hutchinson sign (extension of pigmentation to the nail folds) also are worrisome features.⁵ In recent years, dermoscopy has become an important tool in the clinical examination of LM, with the development of criteria based on color and pattern recognition.^5,6 Dermoscopy can be useful in screening potential candidates for biopsy. Although clinical examination and dermoscopy are essential to evaluating LM, the gold-standard diagnostic test when malignancy is suspected is a nail matrix biopsy.^1,2,6,7

Epidemiology

It is not unusual for patients with darker skin tones to develop LM due to melanocytic activation of multiple nails with age. This finding can be seen in approximately 80% of African American individuals, 30% of Japanese individuals, and 50% of Hispanic individuals.² It has even been reported that approximately 100% of Black patients older than 50 years will have evidence of LM.³

In a retrospective analysis, children presenting with LM tend to have a higher prevalence of nail matrix nevi compared to adults (56.1% [60/106] vs 34.3% [23/66]; P=.005).⁸ Involvement of a single digit in children is most likely indicative of a nevus; however, when an adult presents with LM in a single digit, suspicion for subungual melanoma should be raised.^2,3,9

Two separate single-center retrospective studies showed the prevalence of subungual melanoma in patients presenting with melanonychia in Asia. Jin et al10 reported subungual melanoma in 6.2% (17/275) of Korean patients presenting with melanonychia at a general dermatology clinic from 2002 to 2014. Lyu et al⁸ studied LM in 172 Chinese patients in a dermatology clinic from 2018 to 2021 and reported 9% (6/66) of adults (aged ≥18 years) with subungual melanoma, with no reported cases in childhood (aged <18 years).

Although the prevalence of subungual melanoma in patients with LM is low, it is an important diagnosis that should not be missed. In confirmed cases of subungual melanoma, two-thirds of lesions manifested as LM.^3,10,11 Thus, LM arising in an adult in a single digit is more concerning for malignancy.^2,3,7,9

Individuals of African and Asian descent as well as American Indian individuals are at highest risk for subungual melanoma with a poor prognosis compared to other types of melanoma, largely due to diagnosis at an advanced stage of disease.^3,9 In a retrospective study of 25 patients with surgically treated subungual melanoma, the mean recurrence-free survival was 33.6 months. The recurrence-free survival was 66% at 1 year and 40% at 3 years, and the overall survival rate was 37% at 3 years.¹²

Key clinical features in individuals with darker skin tones

• In patients with darker skin tones, LM tends to occur on multiple nails as a result of melanocytic activation.^2,13
• Several longitudinal bands may be noted on the same nail and the pigmentation of the bands may vary. With age, these longitudinal bands typically increase in number and width.¹³
• Pseudo-Hutchinson sign may be present due to ethnic melanosis of the proximal nail fold.^13,14
• Dermoscopic findings of LM in patients with skin of color include wider bands (P=.0125), lower band brightness (P<.032), and higher frequency of changing appearance of bands (P=.0071).¹⁵

Worth noting

When patients present with LM, thorough examination of the nail plate, periungual skin, and distal pulp of all digits on all extremities with adequate lighting is important.² Dermoscopy is useful, and a gel interface helps for examining the nail plates.⁷

Clinicians should be encouraged to biopsy or immediately refer patients with concerning nail unit lesions. Cases of LM most likely are benign, but if some doubt exists, the lesions should be biopsied or tracked closely with clinical and dermoscopic images, with a biopsy if changes occur.¹⁶ In conjunction with evaluation by a qualified clinician, patients also should be encouraged to take photographs, as the evolution of nail changes is a critical part of clinical decision-making on the need for a biopsy or referral.

Health disparity highlight

Despite the disproportionately high mortality rates from subungual melanoma in Black and Hispanic populations,^3,9 studies often do not adequately represent these populations. Although subungual melanoma is rare, a delay in the diagnosis contributes to high morbidity and mortality rates.

Photographs courtesy of Richard P. Usatine, MD.

THE COMPARISON

A Melanoma in situ manifesting as longitudinal melanonychia (LM) in a single digit in a Black man. Dermoscopy showed irregular dark bands of brown pigmentation and micro-Hutchinson sign on the cuticle (inset).

B Melanoma manifesting as LM with a prominent Hutchinson sign in a Hispanic man, with variable shades of brown covering more than 50% of the nail width.

C Longitudinal melanonychia of at least 2 nails with a pseudo-Hutchinson sign (pigment on the nail folds in a benign case of LM) in a young Black man demonstrating ethnic/racial melanosis. The longitudinal bands, which were caused by benign melanocytic activation, are more gray than brown and are less than 3 mm wide.

Longitudinal melanonychia (LM) is a pigmented linear band—brown, black, or gray—spanning the length of the nail plate due to the presence of excess melanin, which may be attributed to a benign or malignant process and may warrant further investigation.^1,2 The majority of patients who present with LM are diagnosed with melanocytic activation of the nail matrix due to their inherent darker skin tone or various triggers including trauma, infection, and medications. Longitudinal melanonychia secondary to melanocytic activation often occurs spontaneously in patients with skin of color.³ Less commonly, LM is caused by a nail matrix nevus or lentigo; however, LM may arise secondary to subungual melanoma, a more dangerous cause.

A thorough clinical history including duration, recent changes in LM manifestation, nail trauma, or infection is helpful in evaluating patients with LM; however, a history of nail trauma can be misleading, as nail changes attributed to the trauma may in fact be melanoma. Irregularly spaced vertical lines of pigmentation ranging from brown to black with variations in spacing and width are characteristic of subungual melanoma.⁴ Nail dystrophy, granular hyperpigmentation, and Hutchinson sign (extension of pigmentation to the nail folds) also are worrisome features.⁵ In recent years, dermoscopy has become an important tool in the clinical examination of LM, with the development of criteria based on color and pattern recognition.^5,6 Dermoscopy can be useful in screening potential candidates for biopsy. Although clinical examination and dermoscopy are essential to evaluating LM, the gold-standard diagnostic test when malignancy is suspected is a nail matrix biopsy.^1,2,6,7

Epidemiology

It is not unusual for patients with darker skin tones to develop LM due to melanocytic activation of multiple nails with age. This finding can be seen in approximately 80% of African American individuals, 30% of Japanese individuals, and 50% of Hispanic individuals.² It has even been reported that approximately 100% of Black patients older than 50 years will have evidence of LM.³

In a retrospective analysis, children presenting with LM tend to have a higher prevalence of nail matrix nevi compared to adults (56.1% [60/106] vs 34.3% [23/66]; P=.005).⁸ Involvement of a single digit in children is most likely indicative of a nevus; however, when an adult presents with LM in a single digit, suspicion for subungual melanoma should be raised.^2,3,9

Two separate single-center retrospective studies showed the prevalence of subungual melanoma in patients presenting with melanonychia in Asia. Jin et al10 reported subungual melanoma in 6.2% (17/275) of Korean patients presenting with melanonychia at a general dermatology clinic from 2002 to 2014. Lyu et al⁸ studied LM in 172 Chinese patients in a dermatology clinic from 2018 to 2021 and reported 9% (6/66) of adults (aged ≥18 years) with subungual melanoma, with no reported cases in childhood (aged <18 years).

Although the prevalence of subungual melanoma in patients with LM is low, it is an important diagnosis that should not be missed. In confirmed cases of subungual melanoma, two-thirds of lesions manifested as LM.^3,10,11 Thus, LM arising in an adult in a single digit is more concerning for malignancy.^2,3,7,9

Individuals of African and Asian descent as well as American Indian individuals are at highest risk for subungual melanoma with a poor prognosis compared to other types of melanoma, largely due to diagnosis at an advanced stage of disease.^3,9 In a retrospective study of 25 patients with surgically treated subungual melanoma, the mean recurrence-free survival was 33.6 months. The recurrence-free survival was 66% at 1 year and 40% at 3 years, and the overall survival rate was 37% at 3 years.¹²

Key clinical features in individuals with darker skin tones

• In patients with darker skin tones, LM tends to occur on multiple nails as a result of melanocytic activation.^2,13
• Several longitudinal bands may be noted on the same nail and the pigmentation of the bands may vary. With age, these longitudinal bands typically increase in number and width.¹³
• Pseudo-Hutchinson sign may be present due to ethnic melanosis of the proximal nail fold.^13,14
• Dermoscopic findings of LM in patients with skin of color include wider bands (P=.0125), lower band brightness (P<.032), and higher frequency of changing appearance of bands (P=.0071).¹⁵

Worth noting

When patients present with LM, thorough examination of the nail plate, periungual skin, and distal pulp of all digits on all extremities with adequate lighting is important.² Dermoscopy is useful, and a gel interface helps for examining the nail plates.⁷

Clinicians should be encouraged to biopsy or immediately refer patients with concerning nail unit lesions. Cases of LM most likely are benign, but if some doubt exists, the lesions should be biopsied or tracked closely with clinical and dermoscopic images, with a biopsy if changes occur.¹⁶ In conjunction with evaluation by a qualified clinician, patients also should be encouraged to take photographs, as the evolution of nail changes is a critical part of clinical decision-making on the need for a biopsy or referral.

Health disparity highlight

Despite the disproportionately high mortality rates from subungual melanoma in Black and Hispanic populations,^3,9 studies often do not adequately represent these populations. Although subungual melanoma is rare, a delay in the diagnosis contributes to high morbidity and mortality rates.

Photographs courtesy of Richard P. Usatine, MD.

THE COMPARISON

A Melanoma in situ manifesting as longitudinal melanonychia (LM) in a single digit in a Black man. Dermoscopy showed irregular dark bands of brown pigmentation and micro-Hutchinson sign on the cuticle (inset).

B Melanoma manifesting as LM with a prominent Hutchinson sign in a Hispanic man, with variable shades of brown covering more than 50% of the nail width.

C Longitudinal melanonychia of at least 2 nails with a pseudo-Hutchinson sign (pigment on the nail folds in a benign case of LM) in a young Black man demonstrating ethnic/racial melanosis. The longitudinal bands, which were caused by benign melanocytic activation, are more gray than brown and are less than 3 mm wide.

Longitudinal melanonychia (LM) is a pigmented linear band—brown, black, or gray—spanning the length of the nail plate due to the presence of excess melanin, which may be attributed to a benign or malignant process and may warrant further investigation.^1,2 The majority of patients who present with LM are diagnosed with melanocytic activation of the nail matrix due to their inherent darker skin tone or various triggers including trauma, infection, and medications. Longitudinal melanonychia secondary to melanocytic activation often occurs spontaneously in patients with skin of color.³ Less commonly, LM is caused by a nail matrix nevus or lentigo; however, LM may arise secondary to subungual melanoma, a more dangerous cause.

A thorough clinical history including duration, recent changes in LM manifestation, nail trauma, or infection is helpful in evaluating patients with LM; however, a history of nail trauma can be misleading, as nail changes attributed to the trauma may in fact be melanoma. Irregularly spaced vertical lines of pigmentation ranging from brown to black with variations in spacing and width are characteristic of subungual melanoma.⁴ Nail dystrophy, granular hyperpigmentation, and Hutchinson sign (extension of pigmentation to the nail folds) also are worrisome features.⁵ In recent years, dermoscopy has become an important tool in the clinical examination of LM, with the development of criteria based on color and pattern recognition.^5,6 Dermoscopy can be useful in screening potential candidates for biopsy. Although clinical examination and dermoscopy are essential to evaluating LM, the gold-standard diagnostic test when malignancy is suspected is a nail matrix biopsy.^1,2,6,7

Epidemiology

It is not unusual for patients with darker skin tones to develop LM due to melanocytic activation of multiple nails with age. This finding can be seen in approximately 80% of African American individuals, 30% of Japanese individuals, and 50% of Hispanic individuals.² It has even been reported that approximately 100% of Black patients older than 50 years will have evidence of LM.³

In a retrospective analysis, children presenting with LM tend to have a higher prevalence of nail matrix nevi compared to adults (56.1% [60/106] vs 34.3% [23/66]; P=.005).⁸ Involvement of a single digit in children is most likely indicative of a nevus; however, when an adult presents with LM in a single digit, suspicion for subungual melanoma should be raised.^2,3,9

Two separate single-center retrospective studies showed the prevalence of subungual melanoma in patients presenting with melanonychia in Asia. Jin et al10 reported subungual melanoma in 6.2% (17/275) of Korean patients presenting with melanonychia at a general dermatology clinic from 2002 to 2014. Lyu et al⁸ studied LM in 172 Chinese patients in a dermatology clinic from 2018 to 2021 and reported 9% (6/66) of adults (aged ≥18 years) with subungual melanoma, with no reported cases in childhood (aged <18 years).

Although the prevalence of subungual melanoma in patients with LM is low, it is an important diagnosis that should not be missed. In confirmed cases of subungual melanoma, two-thirds of lesions manifested as LM.^3,10,11 Thus, LM arising in an adult in a single digit is more concerning for malignancy.^2,3,7,9

Individuals of African and Asian descent as well as American Indian individuals are at highest risk for subungual melanoma with a poor prognosis compared to other types of melanoma, largely due to diagnosis at an advanced stage of disease.^3,9 In a retrospective study of 25 patients with surgically treated subungual melanoma, the mean recurrence-free survival was 33.6 months. The recurrence-free survival was 66% at 1 year and 40% at 3 years, and the overall survival rate was 37% at 3 years.¹²

Key clinical features in individuals with darker skin tones

• In patients with darker skin tones, LM tends to occur on multiple nails as a result of melanocytic activation.^2,13
• Several longitudinal bands may be noted on the same nail and the pigmentation of the bands may vary. With age, these longitudinal bands typically increase in number and width.¹³
• Pseudo-Hutchinson sign may be present due to ethnic melanosis of the proximal nail fold.^13,14
• Dermoscopic findings of LM in patients with skin of color include wider bands (P=.0125), lower band brightness (P<.032), and higher frequency of changing appearance of bands (P=.0071).¹⁵

Worth noting

When patients present with LM, thorough examination of the nail plate, periungual skin, and distal pulp of all digits on all extremities with adequate lighting is important.² Dermoscopy is useful, and a gel interface helps for examining the nail plates.⁷

Clinicians should be encouraged to biopsy or immediately refer patients with concerning nail unit lesions. Cases of LM most likely are benign, but if some doubt exists, the lesions should be biopsied or tracked closely with clinical and dermoscopic images, with a biopsy if changes occur.¹⁶ In conjunction with evaluation by a qualified clinician, patients also should be encouraged to take photographs, as the evolution of nail changes is a critical part of clinical decision-making on the need for a biopsy or referral.

Health disparity highlight

Despite the disproportionately high mortality rates from subungual melanoma in Black and Hispanic populations,^3,9 studies often do not adequately represent these populations. Although subungual melanoma is rare, a delay in the diagnosis contributes to high morbidity and mortality rates.

Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS)—a chronic, relapsing, inflammatory disorder involving terminal hair follicles in apocrine gland–rich skin—manifests as tender inflamed nodules that transform into abscesses, sinus tracts, and scarring.^1,2 The etiology of HS is multifactorial, encompassing lifestyle, microbiota, hormonal status, and genetic and environmental factors. These factors activate the immune system around the terminal hair follicles and lead to hyperkeratosis of the infundibulum of the hair follicles in intertriginous regions. This progresses to follicular occlusion, stasis, and eventual rupture. Bacterial multiplication within the plugged pilosebaceous units further boosts immune activation. Resident and migrated cells of the innate and adaptive immune system then release proinflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor, IL-1β, and IL-17, which further enhance immune cell influx and inflammation.^3,4 This aberrant immune response propagates the production of deep-seated inflammatory nodules and abscesses.^3-8

The estimated prevalence of HS is 1% worldwide.⁹ It is more prevalent in female and Black patients (0.30%) than White patients (0.09%) and is intermediate in prevalence in the biracial population (0.22%).¹⁰ Hidradenitis suppurativa is thought to be associated with lower socioeconomic status (SES). In a retrospective analysis of HS patients (N=375), approximately one-third of patients were Black, had advanced disease, and had a notably lower SES.¹¹ Furthermore, HS has been reported to be associated with systemic inflammation and comorbidities such as morbid obesity (38.3%) and hypertension (39.6%) as well as other metabolic syndrome–related disorders and depression (48.1%).¹

Hidradenitis suppurativa may contribute to the risk for depression through its substantial impact on health-related quality of life, which culminates in social withdrawal, unemployment, and suicidal thoughts.¹² The high prevalence of depression in individuals with HS¹ and its association with systemic inflammation¹³ increases the likelihood that a common genetic predisposition also may exist between both conditions. Because depression frequently has been discovered as a concomitant diagnosis in patients with HS, we hypothesize that a shared genetic susceptibility also may exist between the 2 disorders. Our study sought to explore data on the co-occurrence of depression with HS, including its demographics and racial data.

Methods

We conducted a PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE as well as Google Scholar using the terms depression and hidradenitis suppurativa to obtain all research articles published from 2000 to 2022. Articles were selected based on relevance to the topic of exploration. English-language articles that directly addressed the epidemiology, etiology, pathophysiology, and co-occurrence of both depression and HS with numerical data were included. Articles were excluded if they did not explore the information of interest on these 2 disorders or did not contain clear statistical data of patients with the 2 concurrent medical conditions.

Results

Twenty-two cross-sectional, prospective, and retrospective studies that fit the search criteria were identified and included in the analysis (eTable).^1,14-34 Sixteen (72.7%) studies were cross-sectional, 5 (22.7%) were retrospective, and only 1 (4.5%) was a prospective study. Only 6 of the studies provided racial data,^{1,14,17,26,28,32} and of them, 4 had predominately White patients,^1,14,26,32 whereas the other 2 had predominantly Black patients.^17,28

Hidradenitis suppurativa was found to coexist with depression in all the studies, with a prevalence of 1.2% to 48.1%. There also was a higher prevalence of depression in HS patients than in the control patients without HS. Furthermore, a recent study by Wright and colleagues¹⁴ stratified the depression prevalence data by age and found a higher prevalence of depression in adults vs children with HS (30% vs 12%).

Comment

Major depression—a chronic and debilitating illness—is the chief cause of disability globally and in the United States alone and has a global lifetime prevalence of 17%.³⁵ In a study of 388 patients diagnosed with depression and 404 community-matched controls who were observed for 10 years, depressed patients had a two-thirds higher likelihood of developing a serious physical illness than controls. The depression-associated elevated risk for serious physical illness persisted after controlling for confounding variables such as alcohol abuse, smoking, and level of physical activity.³⁶ Studies also have demonstrated that HS is more prevalent in Black individuals¹⁰ and in individuals of low SES,³⁷ who are mostly the Black and Hispanic populations that experience the highest burden of racial microaggression³⁸ and disparities in health access and outcomes.^39,40 The severity and chronicity of major depressive disorder also is higher in Black patients compared with White patients (57% vs 39%).⁴¹ Because major depression and HS are most common among Black patients who experience the highest-burden negative financial and health disparities, there may be a shared genetic disposition to both medical conditions.

Moreover, the common detrimental lifestyle choices associated with patients with depression and HS also suggest the possibility of a collective genetic susceptibility. Patients with depression also report increased consumption of alcohol, tobacco, and illicit substances; sedentary lifestyle leading to obesity; and poor compliance with prescribed medical treatment.⁴² Smoking and obesity are known contributors to the pathogenesis of HS, and their modification also is known to positively impact the disease course. In a retrospective single-cohort study, 50% of obese HS patients (n=35) reported a substantial decrease in disease severity after a reduction of more than 15% in body mass index over 2 years following bariatric surgery (n=35).⁴³ Patients with HS also have reported disease remission following extensive weight loss.⁴⁴ In addition, evidence has supported smoking cessation in improving the disease course of HS.⁴³ Because these detrimental lifestyle choices are prevalent in both patients with HS and those with depression, a co-genetic susceptibility also may exist.

Furthermore, depression is characterized by a persistent inflammatory state,^13,45 similar to HS.⁴⁶ Elevated levels of a variety of inflammatory markers, such as C-reactive protein (CRP), IL-6, and soluble intercellular adhesion molecule 1, have been reported in patients with depression compared with healthy controls.^13,45 Further analysis found a positive correlation and a strong association between depression and these inflammatory markers.⁴⁷ Moreover, adipokines regulate inflammatory responses, and adipokines play a role in the pathogenesis of HS. Adipokine levels such as elevated omentin-1 (a recently identified adipokine) were found to be altered in patients with HS compared with controls.⁴⁸ Results from clinical studies and meta-analyses of patients with depression also have demonstrated that adipokines are dysregulated in this population,^49,50 which may be another potential genetic link between depression and HS.

In addition, genetic susceptibility to depression and HS may be shared because the inflammatory markers that have a strong association with depression also have been found to play an important role in HS treatment and disease severity prediction. In a retrospective cohort study of 404 patients, CRP or IL-6 levels were found to be reliable predictors of HS disease severity, which may explain why anti–tumor necrosis factor antibody regimens such as adalimumab and infliximab have clinically ameliorated disease activity in several cases of HS.⁵¹ In a study evaluating these drugs, high baseline levels of high-sensitivity CRP and IL-6 were predictive of patient response to infliximab.⁵² In a meta-analysis evaluating 20,791 participants, an association was found between concurrent depression and CRP. Furthermore, inflammation measured by high levels of CRP or IL-6 was observed to predict future depression.⁵³ If the same inflammatory markers—CRP and IL-6—both play a major role in the disease activity of depression and HS, then a concurrent genetic predisposition may exist.

Conclusion

Understanding the comorbidities, etiologies, and risk factors for the development and progression of HS is an important step toward improved disease management. Available studies on comorbid depression in HS largely involve White patients, and more studies are needed in patients with skin of color, particularly the Black population, who have the highest prevalence of HS.¹⁰ Given the evidence for an association between depression and HS, we suggest a large-scale investigation of this patient population that includes a complete medical history, onset of HS in comparison to the onset of depression, and specific measures of disease progress and lifetime management of depression, which may help to increase knowledge about the role of depression in HS and encourage more research in this area. If shared genetic susceptibility is established, aggressive management of depression in patients at risk for HS may reduce disease incidence and severity as well as the psychological burden on patients.

Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS)—a chronic, relapsing, inflammatory disorder involving terminal hair follicles in apocrine gland–rich skin—manifests as tender inflamed nodules that transform into abscesses, sinus tracts, and scarring.^1,2 The etiology of HS is multifactorial, encompassing lifestyle, microbiota, hormonal status, and genetic and environmental factors. These factors activate the immune system around the terminal hair follicles and lead to hyperkeratosis of the infundibulum of the hair follicles in intertriginous regions. This progresses to follicular occlusion, stasis, and eventual rupture. Bacterial multiplication within the plugged pilosebaceous units further boosts immune activation. Resident and migrated cells of the innate and adaptive immune system then release proinflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor, IL-1β, and IL-17, which further enhance immune cell influx and inflammation.^3,4 This aberrant immune response propagates the production of deep-seated inflammatory nodules and abscesses.^3-8

The estimated prevalence of HS is 1% worldwide.⁹ It is more prevalent in female and Black patients (0.30%) than White patients (0.09%) and is intermediate in prevalence in the biracial population (0.22%).¹⁰ Hidradenitis suppurativa is thought to be associated with lower socioeconomic status (SES). In a retrospective analysis of HS patients (N=375), approximately one-third of patients were Black, had advanced disease, and had a notably lower SES.¹¹ Furthermore, HS has been reported to be associated with systemic inflammation and comorbidities such as morbid obesity (38.3%) and hypertension (39.6%) as well as other metabolic syndrome–related disorders and depression (48.1%).¹

Hidradenitis suppurativa may contribute to the risk for depression through its substantial impact on health-related quality of life, which culminates in social withdrawal, unemployment, and suicidal thoughts.¹² The high prevalence of depression in individuals with HS¹ and its association with systemic inflammation¹³ increases the likelihood that a common genetic predisposition also may exist between both conditions. Because depression frequently has been discovered as a concomitant diagnosis in patients with HS, we hypothesize that a shared genetic susceptibility also may exist between the 2 disorders. Our study sought to explore data on the co-occurrence of depression with HS, including its demographics and racial data.

Methods

We conducted a PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE as well as Google Scholar using the terms depression and hidradenitis suppurativa to obtain all research articles published from 2000 to 2022. Articles were selected based on relevance to the topic of exploration. English-language articles that directly addressed the epidemiology, etiology, pathophysiology, and co-occurrence of both depression and HS with numerical data were included. Articles were excluded if they did not explore the information of interest on these 2 disorders or did not contain clear statistical data of patients with the 2 concurrent medical conditions.

Results

Twenty-two cross-sectional, prospective, and retrospective studies that fit the search criteria were identified and included in the analysis (eTable).^1,14-34 Sixteen (72.7%) studies were cross-sectional, 5 (22.7%) were retrospective, and only 1 (4.5%) was a prospective study. Only 6 of the studies provided racial data,^{1,14,17,26,28,32} and of them, 4 had predominately White patients,^1,14,26,32 whereas the other 2 had predominantly Black patients.^17,28

Hidradenitis suppurativa was found to coexist with depression in all the studies, with a prevalence of 1.2% to 48.1%. There also was a higher prevalence of depression in HS patients than in the control patients without HS. Furthermore, a recent study by Wright and colleagues¹⁴ stratified the depression prevalence data by age and found a higher prevalence of depression in adults vs children with HS (30% vs 12%).

Comment

Major depression—a chronic and debilitating illness—is the chief cause of disability globally and in the United States alone and has a global lifetime prevalence of 17%.³⁵ In a study of 388 patients diagnosed with depression and 404 community-matched controls who were observed for 10 years, depressed patients had a two-thirds higher likelihood of developing a serious physical illness than controls. The depression-associated elevated risk for serious physical illness persisted after controlling for confounding variables such as alcohol abuse, smoking, and level of physical activity.³⁶ Studies also have demonstrated that HS is more prevalent in Black individuals¹⁰ and in individuals of low SES,³⁷ who are mostly the Black and Hispanic populations that experience the highest burden of racial microaggression³⁸ and disparities in health access and outcomes.^39,40 The severity and chronicity of major depressive disorder also is higher in Black patients compared with White patients (57% vs 39%).⁴¹ Because major depression and HS are most common among Black patients who experience the highest-burden negative financial and health disparities, there may be a shared genetic disposition to both medical conditions.

Moreover, the common detrimental lifestyle choices associated with patients with depression and HS also suggest the possibility of a collective genetic susceptibility. Patients with depression also report increased consumption of alcohol, tobacco, and illicit substances; sedentary lifestyle leading to obesity; and poor compliance with prescribed medical treatment.⁴² Smoking and obesity are known contributors to the pathogenesis of HS, and their modification also is known to positively impact the disease course. In a retrospective single-cohort study, 50% of obese HS patients (n=35) reported a substantial decrease in disease severity after a reduction of more than 15% in body mass index over 2 years following bariatric surgery (n=35).⁴³ Patients with HS also have reported disease remission following extensive weight loss.⁴⁴ In addition, evidence has supported smoking cessation in improving the disease course of HS.⁴³ Because these detrimental lifestyle choices are prevalent in both patients with HS and those with depression, a co-genetic susceptibility also may exist.

Furthermore, depression is characterized by a persistent inflammatory state,^13,45 similar to HS.⁴⁶ Elevated levels of a variety of inflammatory markers, such as C-reactive protein (CRP), IL-6, and soluble intercellular adhesion molecule 1, have been reported in patients with depression compared with healthy controls.^13,45 Further analysis found a positive correlation and a strong association between depression and these inflammatory markers.⁴⁷ Moreover, adipokines regulate inflammatory responses, and adipokines play a role in the pathogenesis of HS. Adipokine levels such as elevated omentin-1 (a recently identified adipokine) were found to be altered in patients with HS compared with controls.⁴⁸ Results from clinical studies and meta-analyses of patients with depression also have demonstrated that adipokines are dysregulated in this population,^49,50 which may be another potential genetic link between depression and HS.

In addition, genetic susceptibility to depression and HS may be shared because the inflammatory markers that have a strong association with depression also have been found to play an important role in HS treatment and disease severity prediction. In a retrospective cohort study of 404 patients, CRP or IL-6 levels were found to be reliable predictors of HS disease severity, which may explain why anti–tumor necrosis factor antibody regimens such as adalimumab and infliximab have clinically ameliorated disease activity in several cases of HS.⁵¹ In a study evaluating these drugs, high baseline levels of high-sensitivity CRP and IL-6 were predictive of patient response to infliximab.⁵² In a meta-analysis evaluating 20,791 participants, an association was found between concurrent depression and CRP. Furthermore, inflammation measured by high levels of CRP or IL-6 was observed to predict future depression.⁵³ If the same inflammatory markers—CRP and IL-6—both play a major role in the disease activity of depression and HS, then a concurrent genetic predisposition may exist.

Conclusion

Understanding the comorbidities, etiologies, and risk factors for the development and progression of HS is an important step toward improved disease management. Available studies on comorbid depression in HS largely involve White patients, and more studies are needed in patients with skin of color, particularly the Black population, who have the highest prevalence of HS.¹⁰ Given the evidence for an association between depression and HS, we suggest a large-scale investigation of this patient population that includes a complete medical history, onset of HS in comparison to the onset of depression, and specific measures of disease progress and lifetime management of depression, which may help to increase knowledge about the role of depression in HS and encourage more research in this area. If shared genetic susceptibility is established, aggressive management of depression in patients at risk for HS may reduce disease incidence and severity as well as the psychological burden on patients.

Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS)—a chronic, relapsing, inflammatory disorder involving terminal hair follicles in apocrine gland–rich skin—manifests as tender inflamed nodules that transform into abscesses, sinus tracts, and scarring.^1,2 The etiology of HS is multifactorial, encompassing lifestyle, microbiota, hormonal status, and genetic and environmental factors. These factors activate the immune system around the terminal hair follicles and lead to hyperkeratosis of the infundibulum of the hair follicles in intertriginous regions. This progresses to follicular occlusion, stasis, and eventual rupture. Bacterial multiplication within the plugged pilosebaceous units further boosts immune activation. Resident and migrated cells of the innate and adaptive immune system then release proinflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor, IL-1β, and IL-17, which further enhance immune cell influx and inflammation.^3,4 This aberrant immune response propagates the production of deep-seated inflammatory nodules and abscesses.^3-8

The estimated prevalence of HS is 1% worldwide.⁹ It is more prevalent in female and Black patients (0.30%) than White patients (0.09%) and is intermediate in prevalence in the biracial population (0.22%).¹⁰ Hidradenitis suppurativa is thought to be associated with lower socioeconomic status (SES). In a retrospective analysis of HS patients (N=375), approximately one-third of patients were Black, had advanced disease, and had a notably lower SES.¹¹ Furthermore, HS has been reported to be associated with systemic inflammation and comorbidities such as morbid obesity (38.3%) and hypertension (39.6%) as well as other metabolic syndrome–related disorders and depression (48.1%).¹

Hidradenitis suppurativa may contribute to the risk for depression through its substantial impact on health-related quality of life, which culminates in social withdrawal, unemployment, and suicidal thoughts.¹² The high prevalence of depression in individuals with HS¹ and its association with systemic inflammation¹³ increases the likelihood that a common genetic predisposition also may exist between both conditions. Because depression frequently has been discovered as a concomitant diagnosis in patients with HS, we hypothesize that a shared genetic susceptibility also may exist between the 2 disorders. Our study sought to explore data on the co-occurrence of depression with HS, including its demographics and racial data.

Methods

We conducted a PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE as well as Google Scholar using the terms depression and hidradenitis suppurativa to obtain all research articles published from 2000 to 2022. Articles were selected based on relevance to the topic of exploration. English-language articles that directly addressed the epidemiology, etiology, pathophysiology, and co-occurrence of both depression and HS with numerical data were included. Articles were excluded if they did not explore the information of interest on these 2 disorders or did not contain clear statistical data of patients with the 2 concurrent medical conditions.

Results

Twenty-two cross-sectional, prospective, and retrospective studies that fit the search criteria were identified and included in the analysis (eTable).^1,14-34 Sixteen (72.7%) studies were cross-sectional, 5 (22.7%) were retrospective, and only 1 (4.5%) was a prospective study. Only 6 of the studies provided racial data,^{1,14,17,26,28,32} and of them, 4 had predominately White patients,^1,14,26,32 whereas the other 2 had predominantly Black patients.^17,28

Hidradenitis suppurativa was found to coexist with depression in all the studies, with a prevalence of 1.2% to 48.1%. There also was a higher prevalence of depression in HS patients than in the control patients without HS. Furthermore, a recent study by Wright and colleagues¹⁴ stratified the depression prevalence data by age and found a higher prevalence of depression in adults vs children with HS (30% vs 12%).

Comment

Major depression—a chronic and debilitating illness—is the chief cause of disability globally and in the United States alone and has a global lifetime prevalence of 17%.³⁵ In a study of 388 patients diagnosed with depression and 404 community-matched controls who were observed for 10 years, depressed patients had a two-thirds higher likelihood of developing a serious physical illness than controls. The depression-associated elevated risk for serious physical illness persisted after controlling for confounding variables such as alcohol abuse, smoking, and level of physical activity.³⁶ Studies also have demonstrated that HS is more prevalent in Black individuals¹⁰ and in individuals of low SES,³⁷ who are mostly the Black and Hispanic populations that experience the highest burden of racial microaggression³⁸ and disparities in health access and outcomes.^39,40 The severity and chronicity of major depressive disorder also is higher in Black patients compared with White patients (57% vs 39%).⁴¹ Because major depression and HS are most common among Black patients who experience the highest-burden negative financial and health disparities, there may be a shared genetic disposition to both medical conditions.

Moreover, the common detrimental lifestyle choices associated with patients with depression and HS also suggest the possibility of a collective genetic susceptibility. Patients with depression also report increased consumption of alcohol, tobacco, and illicit substances; sedentary lifestyle leading to obesity; and poor compliance with prescribed medical treatment.⁴² Smoking and obesity are known contributors to the pathogenesis of HS, and their modification also is known to positively impact the disease course. In a retrospective single-cohort study, 50% of obese HS patients (n=35) reported a substantial decrease in disease severity after a reduction of more than 15% in body mass index over 2 years following bariatric surgery (n=35).⁴³ Patients with HS also have reported disease remission following extensive weight loss.⁴⁴ In addition, evidence has supported smoking cessation in improving the disease course of HS.⁴³ Because these detrimental lifestyle choices are prevalent in both patients with HS and those with depression, a co-genetic susceptibility also may exist.

Furthermore, depression is characterized by a persistent inflammatory state,^13,45 similar to HS.⁴⁶ Elevated levels of a variety of inflammatory markers, such as C-reactive protein (CRP), IL-6, and soluble intercellular adhesion molecule 1, have been reported in patients with depression compared with healthy controls.^13,45 Further analysis found a positive correlation and a strong association between depression and these inflammatory markers.⁴⁷ Moreover, adipokines regulate inflammatory responses, and adipokines play a role in the pathogenesis of HS. Adipokine levels such as elevated omentin-1 (a recently identified adipokine) were found to be altered in patients with HS compared with controls.⁴⁸ Results from clinical studies and meta-analyses of patients with depression also have demonstrated that adipokines are dysregulated in this population,^49,50 which may be another potential genetic link between depression and HS.

In addition, genetic susceptibility to depression and HS may be shared because the inflammatory markers that have a strong association with depression also have been found to play an important role in HS treatment and disease severity prediction. In a retrospective cohort study of 404 patients, CRP or IL-6 levels were found to be reliable predictors of HS disease severity, which may explain why anti–tumor necrosis factor antibody regimens such as adalimumab and infliximab have clinically ameliorated disease activity in several cases of HS.⁵¹ In a study evaluating these drugs, high baseline levels of high-sensitivity CRP and IL-6 were predictive of patient response to infliximab.⁵² In a meta-analysis evaluating 20,791 participants, an association was found between concurrent depression and CRP. Furthermore, inflammation measured by high levels of CRP or IL-6 was observed to predict future depression.⁵³ If the same inflammatory markers—CRP and IL-6—both play a major role in the disease activity of depression and HS, then a concurrent genetic predisposition may exist.

Conclusion

Understanding the comorbidities, etiologies, and risk factors for the development and progression of HS is an important step toward improved disease management. Available studies on comorbid depression in HS largely involve White patients, and more studies are needed in patients with skin of color, particularly the Black population, who have the highest prevalence of HS.¹⁰ Given the evidence for an association between depression and HS, we suggest a large-scale investigation of this patient population that includes a complete medical history, onset of HS in comparison to the onset of depression, and specific measures of disease progress and lifetime management of depression, which may help to increase knowledge about the role of depression in HS and encourage more research in this area. If shared genetic susceptibility is established, aggressive management of depression in patients at risk for HS may reduce disease incidence and severity as well as the psychological burden on patients.

The Diagnosis: Proliferating Pilar Cyst

Histopathology revealed an extensive lobulated epithelial proliferation in a characteristic “rolls and scrolls” pattern (Figure 1). This finding along with the patient’s prior diagnosis of keratitis-ichthyosisdeafness (KID) syndrome supported the diagnosis of a proliferating pilar cyst.

Pilar (or trichilemmal) cysts are common dermal cysts typically found on the outer root sheath of hair follicles. They clinically manifest as multiple yellow dome-shaped nodules without central puncta. They are slow growing and histologically are characterized as cysts with a stratified squamous epithelium demonstrating lack of a granular layer (trichilemmal keratinization) with bright red keratin contents and central focal calcification (Figure 2). Pilar cysts are more common in adult women and may be inherited through an autosomal-dominant pattern.¹

Proliferating pilar cysts represent less than 3% of all pilar cysts.² In addition to the characteristic features of a pilar cyst, proliferating pilar cysts generally are larger (can be >6-cm wide) and are more ulcerative.³ Histopathology of proliferating pilar cysts reveals a more extensive epithelial proliferation, yielding a rolls and scrolls appearance, and may demonstrate nuclear atypia.⁴ Proliferating pilar cysts classically manifest as large, raised, smooth and/or ulcerated nodules on the scalp accompanied by areas of excessive hair growth in older women. They generally arise from pre-existing pilar cysts but also may occur sporadically.⁴

The development of multiple proliferating pilar cysts has been observed in patients with KID syndrome, a rare congenital ectodermal disorder characterized by a triad of vascularizing keratitis, hyperkeratosis, and sensorineural deafness.^5,6 It is caused by a missense mutation of the GJB2 gene encoding for connexin 26, a gap junction that facilitates intercellular signaling and is expressed in a variety of structures including the cochlea, cornea, sweat glands, and inner and outer root sheaths of hair follicles.⁷

The differential diagnosis for proliferating pilar cysts includes pilomatrixomas, squamous cell carcinomas, and malignant proliferating pilar tumors. Pilomatrixomas (or calcifying epitheliomas of Malherbe) are the most common adnexal skin tumors in the pediatric population and most commonly present on the head, neck, and arms.⁸ They also can manifest in adults. Pilomatrixomas are benign dermal-subcutaneous tumors encapsulated by connective tissue that are found on the hair matrix and are histologically characterized by basaloid cells, shadow (or ghost) cells, dystrophic calcifications, and giant cells.⁹ The amount of basaloid cells and shadow cells can vary. Tumor progression results in the enucleation of the basaloid cells to form eosinophilic shadow cells in which calcification can occur. Giant cell granulomas may form contiguous with the calcifications. Both proliferating pilar cysts and pilomatrixomas have a rolls and scrolls appearance on low-power microscopy, but the latter are differentiated by their shadow cells and basaloid areas (Figure 3).

Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is the second most common nonmelanoma skin cancer and more commonly affects men. Risk factors for SCC include immunosuppression and exposure to UV radiation. Histopathology of well-differentiated SCCs reveals invasive squamous cells with larger nuclei and a glassy appearance in addition to possible mitotic figures and keratin pearls (Figure 4). They typically manifest in sun-exposed areas such as the scalp, face, forearms, dorsal aspects of the hands, and lower legs.¹⁰ Proliferating pilar tumors often lack the nuclear atypia and invasive architecture of a well-differentiated SCC.

Features of malignant proliferating pilar tumors overlap with proliferating pilar cysts. In addition to the proliferative epithelium with abrupt trichilemmal keratinization that is typical of a proliferating pilar cyst, a malignant proliferating pilar tumor will demonstrate invasion into the surrounding tissue and lymph nodes, mitotic and architectural atypia, and necrosis (Figure 5).¹¹ Malignant proliferating pilar tumors grow rapidly, ranging in size from 1 to 10 cm, and may develop from pre-existing or proliferating pilar cysts or de novo.

The development of multiple proliferating pilar cysts and thus increased risk for progression to malignant proliferating pilar tumors has been observed in patients with KID syndrome.⁶ Our case highlights the importance of early screening and recognition of proliferating pilar tumors in patients with this condition.

The Diagnosis: Proliferating Pilar Cyst

Histopathology revealed an extensive lobulated epithelial proliferation in a characteristic “rolls and scrolls” pattern (Figure 1). This finding along with the patient’s prior diagnosis of keratitis-ichthyosisdeafness (KID) syndrome supported the diagnosis of a proliferating pilar cyst.

Pilar (or trichilemmal) cysts are common dermal cysts typically found on the outer root sheath of hair follicles. They clinically manifest as multiple yellow dome-shaped nodules without central puncta. They are slow growing and histologically are characterized as cysts with a stratified squamous epithelium demonstrating lack of a granular layer (trichilemmal keratinization) with bright red keratin contents and central focal calcification (Figure 2). Pilar cysts are more common in adult women and may be inherited through an autosomal-dominant pattern.¹

Proliferating pilar cysts represent less than 3% of all pilar cysts.² In addition to the characteristic features of a pilar cyst, proliferating pilar cysts generally are larger (can be >6-cm wide) and are more ulcerative.³ Histopathology of proliferating pilar cysts reveals a more extensive epithelial proliferation, yielding a rolls and scrolls appearance, and may demonstrate nuclear atypia.⁴ Proliferating pilar cysts classically manifest as large, raised, smooth and/or ulcerated nodules on the scalp accompanied by areas of excessive hair growth in older women. They generally arise from pre-existing pilar cysts but also may occur sporadically.⁴

The development of multiple proliferating pilar cysts has been observed in patients with KID syndrome, a rare congenital ectodermal disorder characterized by a triad of vascularizing keratitis, hyperkeratosis, and sensorineural deafness.^5,6 It is caused by a missense mutation of the GJB2 gene encoding for connexin 26, a gap junction that facilitates intercellular signaling and is expressed in a variety of structures including the cochlea, cornea, sweat glands, and inner and outer root sheaths of hair follicles.⁷

The differential diagnosis for proliferating pilar cysts includes pilomatrixomas, squamous cell carcinomas, and malignant proliferating pilar tumors. Pilomatrixomas (or calcifying epitheliomas of Malherbe) are the most common adnexal skin tumors in the pediatric population and most commonly present on the head, neck, and arms.⁸ They also can manifest in adults. Pilomatrixomas are benign dermal-subcutaneous tumors encapsulated by connective tissue that are found on the hair matrix and are histologically characterized by basaloid cells, shadow (or ghost) cells, dystrophic calcifications, and giant cells.⁹ The amount of basaloid cells and shadow cells can vary. Tumor progression results in the enucleation of the basaloid cells to form eosinophilic shadow cells in which calcification can occur. Giant cell granulomas may form contiguous with the calcifications. Both proliferating pilar cysts and pilomatrixomas have a rolls and scrolls appearance on low-power microscopy, but the latter are differentiated by their shadow cells and basaloid areas (Figure 3).

Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is the second most common nonmelanoma skin cancer and more commonly affects men. Risk factors for SCC include immunosuppression and exposure to UV radiation. Histopathology of well-differentiated SCCs reveals invasive squamous cells with larger nuclei and a glassy appearance in addition to possible mitotic figures and keratin pearls (Figure 4). They typically manifest in sun-exposed areas such as the scalp, face, forearms, dorsal aspects of the hands, and lower legs.¹⁰ Proliferating pilar tumors often lack the nuclear atypia and invasive architecture of a well-differentiated SCC.

Features of malignant proliferating pilar tumors overlap with proliferating pilar cysts. In addition to the proliferative epithelium with abrupt trichilemmal keratinization that is typical of a proliferating pilar cyst, a malignant proliferating pilar tumor will demonstrate invasion into the surrounding tissue and lymph nodes, mitotic and architectural atypia, and necrosis (Figure 5).¹¹ Malignant proliferating pilar tumors grow rapidly, ranging in size from 1 to 10 cm, and may develop from pre-existing or proliferating pilar cysts or de novo.

The development of multiple proliferating pilar cysts and thus increased risk for progression to malignant proliferating pilar tumors has been observed in patients with KID syndrome.⁶ Our case highlights the importance of early screening and recognition of proliferating pilar tumors in patients with this condition.

The Diagnosis: Proliferating Pilar Cyst

Histopathology revealed an extensive lobulated epithelial proliferation in a characteristic “rolls and scrolls” pattern (Figure 1). This finding along with the patient’s prior diagnosis of keratitis-ichthyosisdeafness (KID) syndrome supported the diagnosis of a proliferating pilar cyst.

Pilar (or trichilemmal) cysts are common dermal cysts typically found on the outer root sheath of hair follicles. They clinically manifest as multiple yellow dome-shaped nodules without central puncta. They are slow growing and histologically are characterized as cysts with a stratified squamous epithelium demonstrating lack of a granular layer (trichilemmal keratinization) with bright red keratin contents and central focal calcification (Figure 2). Pilar cysts are more common in adult women and may be inherited through an autosomal-dominant pattern.¹

Proliferating pilar cysts represent less than 3% of all pilar cysts.² In addition to the characteristic features of a pilar cyst, proliferating pilar cysts generally are larger (can be >6-cm wide) and are more ulcerative.³ Histopathology of proliferating pilar cysts reveals a more extensive epithelial proliferation, yielding a rolls and scrolls appearance, and may demonstrate nuclear atypia.⁴ Proliferating pilar cysts classically manifest as large, raised, smooth and/or ulcerated nodules on the scalp accompanied by areas of excessive hair growth in older women. They generally arise from pre-existing pilar cysts but also may occur sporadically.⁴

The development of multiple proliferating pilar cysts has been observed in patients with KID syndrome, a rare congenital ectodermal disorder characterized by a triad of vascularizing keratitis, hyperkeratosis, and sensorineural deafness.^5,6 It is caused by a missense mutation of the GJB2 gene encoding for connexin 26, a gap junction that facilitates intercellular signaling and is expressed in a variety of structures including the cochlea, cornea, sweat glands, and inner and outer root sheaths of hair follicles.⁷

The differential diagnosis for proliferating pilar cysts includes pilomatrixomas, squamous cell carcinomas, and malignant proliferating pilar tumors. Pilomatrixomas (or calcifying epitheliomas of Malherbe) are the most common adnexal skin tumors in the pediatric population and most commonly present on the head, neck, and arms.⁸ They also can manifest in adults. Pilomatrixomas are benign dermal-subcutaneous tumors encapsulated by connective tissue that are found on the hair matrix and are histologically characterized by basaloid cells, shadow (or ghost) cells, dystrophic calcifications, and giant cells.⁹ The amount of basaloid cells and shadow cells can vary. Tumor progression results in the enucleation of the basaloid cells to form eosinophilic shadow cells in which calcification can occur. Giant cell granulomas may form contiguous with the calcifications. Both proliferating pilar cysts and pilomatrixomas have a rolls and scrolls appearance on low-power microscopy, but the latter are differentiated by their shadow cells and basaloid areas (Figure 3).

Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is the second most common nonmelanoma skin cancer and more commonly affects men. Risk factors for SCC include immunosuppression and exposure to UV radiation. Histopathology of well-differentiated SCCs reveals invasive squamous cells with larger nuclei and a glassy appearance in addition to possible mitotic figures and keratin pearls (Figure 4). They typically manifest in sun-exposed areas such as the scalp, face, forearms, dorsal aspects of the hands, and lower legs.¹⁰ Proliferating pilar tumors often lack the nuclear atypia and invasive architecture of a well-differentiated SCC.

Features of malignant proliferating pilar tumors overlap with proliferating pilar cysts. In addition to the proliferative epithelium with abrupt trichilemmal keratinization that is typical of a proliferating pilar cyst, a malignant proliferating pilar tumor will demonstrate invasion into the surrounding tissue and lymph nodes, mitotic and architectural atypia, and necrosis (Figure 5).¹¹ Malignant proliferating pilar tumors grow rapidly, ranging in size from 1 to 10 cm, and may develop from pre-existing or proliferating pilar cysts or de novo.

The development of multiple proliferating pilar cysts and thus increased risk for progression to malignant proliferating pilar tumors has been observed in patients with KID syndrome.⁶ Our case highlights the importance of early screening and recognition of proliferating pilar tumors in patients with this condition.